In addition, should_yield() seems to have a problem:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.devel.cvs.src/167287
--
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, s
On 27/05/13 12:23, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:19:51AM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>> On 27/05/13 08:07, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:22:54AM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:52:07PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:19:51AM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> On 27/05/13 08:07, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:22:54AM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:52:07PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> >>> On 26/05/13 22:20, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On 27/05/13 08:07, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:22:54AM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
>> On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:52:07PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>>> On 26/05/13 22:20, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
Instead of a pause() that may be too short or too long, how about
>
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 12:22:54AM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:52:07PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> > On 26/05/13 22:20, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> > > Instead of a pause() that may be too short or too long, how about
> > > waiting for the necessary lock? In other wo
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:52:07PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On 26/05/13 22:20, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> > Instead of a pause() that may be too short or too long, how about
> > waiting for the necessary lock? In other words, replace the kern_yield()
> > call with VI_LOCK(vp); VI_UNLOCK(vp);.
On 26/05/13 22:20, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> Instead of a pause() that may be too short or too long, how about
> waiting for the necessary lock? In other words, replace the kern_yield()
> call with VI_LOCK(vp); VI_UNLOCK(vp);. This is also the usual approach
> to acquire two locks without imposing a
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 09:28:05PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On 25/05/13 19:52, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On 20/05/13 20:34, John Baldwin wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 1:15:47 pm Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On 14/05/13 18:31, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at
On 25/05/13 19:52, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On 20/05/13 20:34, John Baldwin wrote:
>> On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 1:15:47 pm Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On 14/05/13 18:31, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 06:08:45PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> On 13/05/13 17:00, Konstanti
On 20/05/13 20:34, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 1:15:47 pm Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On 14/05/13 18:31, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 06:08:45PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
On 13/05/13 17:00, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at
On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 1:15:47 pm Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On 14/05/13 18:31, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 06:08:45PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> >> On 13/05/13 17:00, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>
On 14/05/13 18:31, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 06:08:45PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>> On 13/05/13 17:00, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
On 13/05/13 13:18, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for taki
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 06:08:45PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> On 13/05/13 17:00, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> >> On 13/05/13 13:18, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>
> Thanks for taking a look,
>
> >> I would like to explain this a
On 13/05/13 17:00, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
>> On 13/05/13 13:18, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
Thanks for taking a look,
>> I would like to explain this a little bit more, the syncer process
>> doesn't get blocked on the _mtx_trylock_
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 04:33:04PM +0200, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> On 13/05/13 13:18, Roger Pau Monn? wrote:
> > The VM can be stuck in this state for quite some time, it generally
>
> I would like to explain this a little bit more, the syncer process
> doesn't get blocked on the _mtx_trylock_flag
On 13/05/13 13:18, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> The VM can be stuck in this state for quite some time, it generally
I would like to explain this a little bit more, the syncer process
doesn't get blocked on the _mtx_trylock_flags_ call, it just continues
looping forever in what seems to be an endless l
Hello,
I've set up a FreeBSD-HEAD VM on Xen, and compiled the XENHVM kernel,
last commit in the repository is:
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 12:39:14 +
Subject: [PATCH] By request, add an arrow from NetBSD-0.8 to FreeBSD-1.0.
While here, add a few more NetBSD versions to the tree itself.
Submitted
17 matches
Mail list logo
