Ville-Pertti Keinonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike O'Dell) writes:
> > we published the best Unix SMP paper I've ever seen in Computing
> > Systems - from the Amdahl guys who did an SMP version of the kernel
> > by very clever hacks on SPLx() macros to make them spin locks and
> > a bit of other clever trickery on the source. they could take a stock
>
> An approach like that can't possibly be sufficient if code has been
> written with the assumption that only interrupt-like events or
> blocking calls can change things from under it. There is quite a bit
> of code in FreeBSD that relies on this.
>
Can you elaborate on this a bit more? I think I missing
some of the finer points on what you are saying.
I work on interrupt driven device drivers and I'm trying
to see how this ties in.
---
"I'd rather pay for my freedom than live in a bitmapped,
pop-up-happy dungeon like NT."
http://www.performancecomputing.com/features/9809of1.shtml
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
