Re: How priority propagation works on read/write lock?

2006/1/18, Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I assume we already know how to propagate priority for mutexes, so > once you know how to propagate for RWlocks, it all just works. As I can see, propagate priority for mutex needs a little modify to turnstiles code, that's not a great deal. > Yes,

Re: How priority propagation works on read/write lock?

2006/1/18, Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >You will eventually do priority propagation for all of them > (A, B, and C) until G's priority is <= the priority of RW1. > It doesn't matter if you do one at a time or all of them > at once. They all (A, B, C) have to release RW1 before > G can run

Re: How priority propagation works on read/write lock?

>> This approach fails beacause you need to propagate priority for any blocking >> thread for any owners (if needed). > I'm not sure I follow -- got a simple example? > A writer won't be able to get the write lock until _all_ of the > current read lock owners have released the lock. It doesn't >

Re: rescheduling tasks using swi_add()

2006/1/11, kamal kc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > dear everybody, > > i had previous thread going on about the cpu load > average. and had some discussion regarding it. i have > a newer thing to discuss on so i started this thread. > > as i mentioned earlier i had put some code in the > bridge.c > that

Re: Puzzled about turnstile's lock

> Hi hackers, > I want to understand the current implementation of > turnstile,and meet some questions about its locks' logicality. [snip] It's used to lock td_contested member of struct thread structure and all issues linked to it (as you can see in the source tree). It seems used in a clean wa

Re: getdirentries_args and other kernel syscall structures

2005/11/23, Daniel Rudy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Ok, I'va got a little question here. In the structure > getdirentries_args, there seems to be duplicated fields that I'm not > entirely sure what they do. Here's the definition of a structure > verbatim from sys/sysproto.h: > > struct getdirentries

about gcc code assembly

Hi, compiling something like: #include static int a; void f() { printf("%d\n", a); } with: > gcc -S -o trial.S trial.c We got: [snip] ... .local a .comm a, 4, 4 .ident "GCC: (GNU) 3.4.2 [FreeBSD] 20040728" But using .lcomm would not be better? (.lcomm a, 4) cheers, Attilio -- Peace can o

Re: Memory Leak && Free Problem

to make sense" Probabilly (I've not seen the whole code), since new_body and origin_resp_body points to the same chunk, memory is freed passing from new_body. greetings, rookie -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein __