cvs commit: src/sys/dev/hwpmc hwpmc_mod.c src/sys/dev/random randomdev_soft.c src/sys/kern kern_intr.c kern_poll.c kern_synch.c kern_thr.c kern_umtx.c sched_4bsd.c subr_taskqueue.c uipc_mqueue.c src/sys/vm vm_zeroidle.c

[Gleb Smirnoff]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 03:14:03PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
J> >   Change msleep() and tsleep() to not alter the calling thread's priority
J> >   if the specified priority is zero.  This avoids a race where the calling
J> >   thread could read a snapshot of it's current priority, then a different
J> >   thread could change the first thread's priority, then the original thread
J> >   would call sched_prio() inside msleep() undoing the change made by the
J> >   second thread.  I used a priority of zero as no thread that calls msleep()
J> >   or tsleep() should be specifying a priority of zero anyway.
J> >   
J> >   The various places that passed 'curthread->td_priority' or some variant
J> >   as the priority now pass 0.
J> 
J> This should fix the problem where the first acpi taskq would run with
J> a bogus priority (the sched_prio() when creating the taskqueue seemed
J> to be ignored).

Sorry for probably lame guess... Is this going to fix the problem with
ACPI and new taskqueues?

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.
GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE