Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 18:07:24 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, Dan Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Request for review: getcontext, setcontext, etc Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020107175502.12444A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0201071431020.28827-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > "Dan, In your example, are you indicating more munching on behalf > of thread 2 or continued munching in the FPU as a carryover from > thread1? (lazy context swapping?)" Nate answered it correctly, so I didn't reply to it. Thread 1 only munches data for thread 1, and likewise for thread 2. I used pthread_yield() just to show that it was not a signal or preemption (which in libc_r, are generated by signals too). I could have used pthread_mutex_lock(), read(), write(), malloc(), etc., instead of pthread_yield(). > I understand the concepts I was just not sure which he > was representing.. -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SUN.3.91.1020107175502.12444A-100000>