Re: Critical section

[Mindaugas Rasiukevicius <rmind%netbsd.org@localhost>]

Masao Uebayashi <uebayasi%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost>
> wrote:
> > That is not true.  If the softint thread sleeps, control is returned
> > back to the preempted lwp.
> 
> You're right.  I keep forgetting how softint works.  Sigh.
> 
> <...>
> 
> (Calling "interrupted" threads as "preempted" threads is confusing.
> It's a pity that these are called differently (l_switchto, pinned,
> ...).)

Well, the term "interrupt" itself generally implies resuming to the
original activity. :)  Having software interrupts to switch away would
arguably erase this technically small but conceptually significant
difference between "interrupt" and "preemption".

-- 
Mindaugas