Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!amdcad!sun!pepper!cmcmanis
From: cmcmanis@pepper.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: How do I force a context switch?
Message-ID: <24762@sun.uucp>
Date: Mon, 3-Aug-87 16:38:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.24762
Posted: Mon Aug  3 16:38:07 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 5-Aug-87 03:29:46 EDT
References: <5175@utcsri.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis)
Distribution: world
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 22

In article <5175@utcsri.UUCP> flaps@utcsri.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
.>
.>How does a task tell the exec that it wants to give up the rest of its
.>current cpu-time quantum?  I am currently using Delay(1L), which will
.>probably work fine but is exceedingly ugly.
.>
.>In case you want to know, this is why I need to force a context
.>switch.  I'm writing a program where several tasks are started.
.>Through use of priorities, all are started at once.  One of these
.>functions sets a global variable that others need.

One way to do this would be to have the slave tasks all wait on one of the
'break' signals. (^C ^D ^E ^F). When the main task has set the global
it could signal all of the other tasks that the global was ready to be
used. A more robust way would be to have the task that sets the global
start the other tasks after it has set it. Then no sleeping would be required.
A third way is to use a named message port to pass around the data. 


--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: cmcmanis  ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.