On 24-Feb-02 Matthew Dillon wrote: > Apart from all the assembly coding, there were two serious issues. > fork_exit() assumes that interrupts are hard-disabled on entry. I > readjusted the code such that the trampoline assembly initialized > the td_critnest count so it could STI prior to calling fork_exit().
Err, this is a feature. It isn't safe for us to take an interrupt until we have safeuly cleaned up and released sched_lock. > The second issue is that cpu_switch() does not save/restore the > PSL_I (interrupt disablement mask). I added a PSL word to the PCB > structure to take care of the problem. Without this if you have > a thread switch away while holding interrupts hard-disabled, the > next thread will inherit the hard disablement. I saw the sti's > you added in various places but I figured the best solution was > to simply save/restore the state. The original code didn't have > this problem because interrupts were always hard-disabled while > holding the sched_lock and, of course, cpu_switch() is always > called while holding sched_lock. (Similarly, icu_lock needed > hard-disablements wrapped around it for the same reason, because > a level interrupt still needs to be able to get icu_lock in order to > defer itself). That's cause the state of PSL_I is saved in td_savecrit. Note that the only caller of cpu_switch() is mi_switch(). You need to look at the two functions together. Much of the stuff that used to be in asm is now in C to make the code more portable so that supporting other arch's is easier. While the state for pending interrupts should be per-CPU, you should still be using some per-thread state since we can call switch with interrupts disabled (this happens when we preempt with interrupts disabled.) Speaking of preemption. :) critical_enter/exit are specifically divided into two portions: and MD portion and an MI portion. The preemption patches grow the MI functions a bit to handle deferred preemptions. It would be best if instead of getting rid of the MI functions you would work within the existing framework and architecture and change the implementation of cpu_critical_enter/exit. Note that you have a fully opaque type critical_t to allow you to store whatever per-thread state you wish. Also, you are free to use whatever per-CPU state as well. > In anycase, I have successfully built the world in a -current > SMP + apic_vector system. Tomorrow I will cleanup on the UP icu_vector > code to match the apic_vector code and post the results. I also > have a sysctl that allows developers to toggle the mode for testing > purposes (old way or new way). > > Finally, I took your suggestion in regards to not trying to combine > the masks together. I have a 'some sort of interrupt is pending' > variable then I have fpending (for fast interrupts), ipending (for > normal interrupt threads), and spending (which I use for the stat and > hardclock forwarding). They're all per-cpu entities, of course. > unpend() prioritizes them. > > In anycase, I'll post it all tomorrow after I've got icu_vector cleaned > up. One of the best things about this patch set is that it is really > flexible. We should be able to really make interrupts fly. In fact, > it should even be possible for one cpu to steal another cpu's pending > interrupt(s) fairly trivially, without having to resort to IPIs. Eww, how does that work unless the other CPU uses an atomic op to clear the bit, which means that now the local CPU needs to use atomic ops to ensure consistent data. > -Matt -- John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message