Hello, Just a Re: on some IRC discussion. We were trying to set bound_processor by default to cpu0 to make sure that everything happens on just one cpu by default, to put things on cpu1 progressively. But that was leading to ext2fs hanging. At some point it was mentioned that
“sometimes, default_pset.runq.runq.next.next shows the same thread than processor_ptr[0].runq.runq.next” That's really not supposed to happen. It could be useful to put printfs in thread_setrun in the if ((processor = th->bound_processor) == PROCESSOR_NULL) case, which is not supposed to happen, to determine when we are actually getting there with such case. I had been looking at the linux code, it really isn't smp-safe, so we will need to keep ext2fs bound to cpu0 to avoid any kind of concurrency when it accesses the disk. It might even be useful to put some assertions to make sure that no code of linux/ is getting to run on cpu1. Samuel
