From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4C1508AC.5010400@bouyapop.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:34:52 +0200
From: Philippe Anel <xigh@bouyapop.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100318)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
References: <8ebe5bdc32ec6d9b7efc27b0b0b3697c@hamnavoe.com>	<4C14EA90.8020108@bouyapop.org>
	<AANLkTinQ86A6xtPrpWBukwdsZBOPBoDUUPu-coSuDkjl@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinQ86A6xtPrpWBukwdsZBOPBoDUUPu-coSuDkjl@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9vx, kproc and *double sleep*
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3247b65a-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Should be, at least I think so. But I don't even know yet how we  can do
this.  :)
I think we can use the go trick and postpone the call to ready() while
p->mach != 0.
But I don't know where yet.

Phil;

ron minnich wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Philippe Anel <xigh@bouyapop.org> wrote:
>
>> In fact you're right, and this shows us this would only happens to 9vx.
>> Indeed, the proc is a kproc and thus is not scheduled by the 9vx/a/proc.c
>> scheduler,
>> but by the one in 9vx/sched.c ... where dequeueproc() is not called and
>> where p->mach
>> is not checked.
>>
>
> So is changing 9vx/sched.c to do these two steps the real fix?
>
> ron
>
>
>