On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 11:56 AM, matthew green wrote:
> Since we already use preempt_disable() to force an lwp to stick to a cpu,
> doesn't that solve the problem? If need
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 11:56 AM, matthew green wrote:
>>> > Since we already use preempt_disable() to force an lwp to stick to a cpu,
>>> > doesn't that solve the problem? If need be, we can enforce nonpreemptable
>>> > lwp's don't migrate.
On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 11:56 AM, matthew green wrote:
>> > Since we already use preempt_disable() to force an lwp to stick to a cpu,
>> > doesn't that solve the problem? If need be, we can enforce nonpreemptable
>> > lwp's don't migrate.
>
> why would we want to disable preemption in code that m
> > Since we already use preempt_disable() to force an lwp to stick to a cpu,
> > doesn't that solve the problem? If need be, we can enforce nonpreemptable
> > lwp's don't migrate.
why would we want to disable preemption in code that merely wants
to run on a particular cpu.
i dno't understand wh
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
>
>> On Jun 13, 2016, at 5:53 PM, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Taylor R Campbell
>> wrote:
>>> Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:00:16 +0200
>>> From: Joerg Sonnenberger
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:36:31PM +
> On Jun 13, 2016, at 5:53 PM, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Taylor R Campbell
> wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:00:16 +0200
>> From: Joerg Sonnenberger
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:36:31PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>>> Currently we do it by open-codin
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, David Young wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:56:57AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki w
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, David Young wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:56:57AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>> >> - curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
>> >> - curlwp_
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:56:57AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> >> - curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
> >> - curlwp_bound_set and curlwp_bound_restore
> >> - curlwp_bound and c
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>> - curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
>> - curlwp_bound_set and curlwp_bound_restore
>> - curlwp_bound and curlwp_boundx
>>
>> Any other ideas? :)
>
> curlwp_bind_push / curlwp_bi
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:53:33AM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> - curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
> - curlwp_bound_set and curlwp_bound_restore
> - curlwp_bound and curlwp_boundx
>
> Any other ideas? :)
curlwp_bind_push / curlwp_bind_pop
Joerg
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Paul Goyette wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>
>>> Perhaps the name should be `curlwp_bound_restore' or something else to
>>> emphasize this, but I haven't come up with one that I like better on
>>> aesthetic grounds.
>>
>>
>> - curlwp_bind and cu
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
Perhaps the name should be `curlwp_bound_restore' or something else to
emphasize this, but I haven't come up with one that I like better on
aesthetic grounds.
- curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
- curlwp_bound_set and curlwp_bound_restore
- curlwp_bound and
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Taylor R Campbell
wrote:
>Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:00:16 +0200
>From: Joerg Sonnenberger
>
>On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:36:31PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>> Currently we do it by open-coding in each place,
>> but we should provide some API to
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:00:16 +0200
From: Joerg Sonnenberger
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:36:31PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> Currently we do it by open-coding in each place,
> but we should provide some API to simplify codes.
> riastradh@ suggested curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:36:31PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> Currently we do it by open-coding in each place,
> but we should provide some API to simplify codes.
> riastradh@ suggested curlwp_bind and curlwp_unbind
> some time ago (*1) and this patch (*2) just follows
> the idea.
The primary que
Hi,
In order to use psref(9) in a normal LWP context,
we have to ensure the LWP doesn't migrate between
CPUs. To this end, for now we set LP_BOUND to
curlwp->l_pflag.
Currently we do it by open-coding in each place,
but we should provide some API to simplify codes.
riastradh@ suggested curlwp_bin
17 matches
Mail list logo
