Re: ithread priority question...
From: Julian Elischer (julian_at_elischer.org)
Date: 06/23/04
- Previous message: Julian Elischer: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- In reply to: Bosko Milekic: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- Next in thread: Daniel Eischen: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- Reply: Daniel Eischen: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:11:36 -0700 (PDT) To: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@FreeBSD.org>
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Bosko Milekic wrote:
>
> I'm obviously talking nonsense below. Sorry.
>
> The real explanation is that they are put on a runqueue when executed:
>
> if (TD_AWAITING_INTR(td)) {
> CTR2(KTR_INTR, "%s: setrunqueue %d", __func__, p->p_pid);
> TD_CLR_IWAIT(td);
> setrunqueue(td);
> if (do_switch &&
> (ctd->td_critnest == 1) ) {
> ...
>
> Sorry again!
yes.. the question is.. does it make sense in a world with multiple
schedulers to multiply set the priority of each ithread to
(inumber * RQ_PPQ)?
It happens to work with 4bsd and probably with ULE
but it wouldn't make a lot of sense with (say) a monte-carlo scheduler
that may not have run queues as such (such as Luigi did) or any
scheduler for which RQ_PPQ was not a constant.
>
> -bosko
>
> Julian Elischer wrote:
> >On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, John Baldwin wrote:
> ...
> >> That was the intention. One question though, if the ithreads aren't on the
> >> system run queues then which run queues are they on?
> >
> >aren't they run from the interupt?
>
> Not always. They have to be put on a runqueue if they block on a
> mutex, say.
>
> -Bosko
>
>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Julian Elischer: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- In reply to: Bosko Milekic: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- Next in thread: Daniel Eischen: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- Reply: Daniel Eischen: "Re: ithread priority question..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
