From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4C15141C.4090502@bouyapop.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:23:40 +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>
	<4C1508AC.5010400@bouyapop.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C1508AC.5010400@bouyapop.org>
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: 324e161c-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Hi,

The solution is not that simple. I mean when kprocs go to sleep
through the call to psleep(), a pwakeup() is required. We cannot
simply change the following sched.c:^runproc() part :

    while((p = kprocq.head) == nil){

by:

    while(((p = kprocq.head) == nil) || p->mach){

The a/proc.c scheduler is different as it goes idle and can be
awakened by an interrupt (or a working kproc in 9vx).

Phil;
>>
>> So is changing 9vx/sched.c to do these two steps the real fix?
>>
>> ron