2010/8/11 Kostik Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:51:27AM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: >> Author: attilio >> Date: Wed Aug 11 10:51:27 2010 >> New Revision: 211176 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/211176 >> >> Log: >> IPI handlers may run generally with interrupts disabled because they >> are served via an interrupt gate. >> >> However, that doesn't explicitly prevent preemption and thread >> migration thus scheduler pinning may be necessary in some handlers. >> Fix that. > > How the preemption is supposed to happen ? Aside from the explicit > calls to mi_switch() from e.g. critical_exit().
IIRC it should be hardclock() willing to schedule the softclock(). It is the critical_exit() in the thread_unlock() that may trigger it (sorry for not digging more, it was a while back that I hacked this part, but I guess you can verify on your own). We already have other points within the kernel that take care of dealing with preemption/migration like lapic_handle_timer(), for example. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
