Lines Matching refs:that

5 	under ps_spinlock.  There are three places where that can happen:
15 	ps_tq_int() are sandwiched between {A,C} and B in that sequence,
41 	  on the path that returns 0
45 	* in pi_wake_up() called for PIA that belongs to pd.c, everything from
49 	1) at any time at most one thread of execution can be in that area or
52 	that thread.
54 	held by that thread.
60 (1) can become not true if some thread enters that area while another is there.
64 	   mean that (2) was already not true.
69 	   ps_spinlock and ps_tq_active is 1 (due to Lemma 1).  It means that
72 	   case that needs consideration is call from pi_wake_up() and there
73 	   we would have to be called for the PIA that got ->claimed_cont
75 	   called from pd.c for that PIA, which happens only for PIA belonging
79 	   pd.c.  It means that (4) was already not true.
82 	Indeed, pd_busy is reset only in the area and thread that resets
85 	But that code does not reset pd_busy, so pd_busy would have to be
88 	the thread that had reset it would be in the area simulateously.
107 check its value is in ps_set_intr() and if it had been non-zero at that
113 that the only possible contention is between scheduling ps_tq followed by
123 We don't need to reset it to NULL, since we are guaranteed that there