From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20110701183512.CFF4DB84F@mail.bitblocks.com>
References: <20110701160026.0db036cd@leffe.cs.bell-labs.com>
	<83656e84a9290648e03a7e880786e132@ladd.quanstro.net>
	<BANLkTikaVKx85WXzeZkiBWaOWXW1hCmX9Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimi9--KwDHY7u0KCpZO_6B5n6bEwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<bb78dd1fd32a508d375ac34343222402@ladd.quanstro.net>
	<20110701183512.CFF4DB84F@mail.bitblocks.com>
From: Venkatesh Srinivas <me@acm.jhu.edu>
Date: Sat,  2 Jul 2011 01:06:37 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAcG=3NWQKi9zsLn8O1HrHyJokNpHSnpEcdmPeNwZDUhY-s__g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [9fans] why not halt in x86 multicore
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f90e8d4a-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On i386 systems with MONITOR/MWAIT, you could use them; simpler than
adding support for IPIs, I imagine.

-- vs