Re: question on asymmetric mtx_[un]lock_sleep

2008-09-17 Thread Marc Lörner
On Wednesday 10 September 2008 20:09, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 10 September 2008 04:19:30 am Marc Lörner wrote: > > On Tuesday 09 September 2008 21:38, John Baldwin wrote: > > > On Thursday 04 September 2008 08:00:04 am Marc Lörner wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I just read through the cod

Re: question on asymmetric mtx_[un]lock_sleep

2008-09-10 Thread John Baldwin
On Wednesday 10 September 2008 04:19:30 am Marc Lörner wrote: > On Tuesday 09 September 2008 21:38, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Thursday 04 September 2008 08:00:04 am Marc Lörner wrote: > > > Hello, > > > I just read through the code of mutexes and turnstiles > > > and it seems to me that _mtx_lock_

Re: question on asymmetric mtx_[un]lock_sleep

2008-09-10 Thread Marc Lörner
On Tuesday 09 September 2008 21:38, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday 04 September 2008 08:00:04 am Marc Lörner wrote: > > Hello, > > I just read through the code of mutexes and turnstiles > > and it seems to me that _mtx_lock_sleep and _mtx_unlock_sleep > > are some kind of asymmetric when turning

Re: question on asymmetric mtx_[un]lock_sleep

2008-09-09 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday 04 September 2008 08:00:04 am Marc Lörner wrote: > Hello, > I just read through the code of mutexes and turnstiles > and it seems to me that _mtx_lock_sleep and _mtx_unlock_sleep > are some kind of asymmetric when turning SMP and adaptive mutexes > on in kernel-configuration. > > On lo

question on asymmetric mtx_[un]lock_sleep

2008-09-04 Thread Marc Lörner
Hello, I just read through the code of mutexes and turnstiles and it seems to me that _mtx_lock_sleep and _mtx_unlock_sleep are some kind of asymmetric when turning SMP and adaptive mutexes on in kernel-configuration. On locking the mutex, we try to "quick" obtain the lock. If we can't do this, we