Re: Linux Preemptive patch success 2.4.10-pre4 + lots of other patches

From: Chris Ricker (kaboom@gatech.edu)
Date: Fri Sep 07 2001 - 07:56:26 EST


On 7 Sep 2001, Robert Love wrote:

> On Fri, 2001-09-07 at 01:19, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > The other Unices are at least evenly split, or mostly preemptible.
> > Typically, a more complex strategy is used where spinlocks can sleep
> > after a few spins. This patch is very conservative in that regard,
> > it basically just uses the structure we already have, SMP spinlocks.
>
> I did not know other Unices were (in general) preemptible. Solaris is?
> The only one I thought was preemptible was Irix.

Solaris is, and has been since good ol' Solaris 2.0. So's AIX and even more
obscure things like DG/UX. I'd think all SysVR4 derivatives have to be, by
virtue of the SysV schedular (threads have priorities from 0 to 159; system
threads run from 60 to 99, so the schedular must be able to preempt system
threads for the real-time threads from 100 to 159).

later,
chris

-- 
Chris Ricker                                               kaboom@gatech.edu
                                                          chris@gurulabs.com

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:40 EST