From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Nov 14 4:50:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C580C14DB2 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 1999 04:50:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA17163 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:50:17 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id NAA39497 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Sun, 14 Nov 1999 13:50:16 +0100 (MET) Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE39C14DB2 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 1999 04:50:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from vigrid.com (pm3-pt38.pcnet.net [206.105.29.112]) by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.8.7/PCNet) with ESMTP id HAA22473; Sun, 14 Nov 1999 07:48:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <382EAFF8.7E144B94@vigrid.com> Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 07:50:00 -0500 From: "Daniel M. Eischen" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer Cc: Michael Schuster - TSC SunOS Germany , "freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG" Subject: Re: Threads goals and implementation References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Daniel M. Eischen wrote: > > > It is probable that we will need a different syscall calling convension > > > to handle teh async nature of the world. If we use a second syscall gate, > > > we can intermix old and new system calls during development. > > > > OK, I can see how a different syscall gate might be useful during > > development. > > more than that.. Old binaries must continue to run, and thus programs > linked with libc might continue to use the old syscalls (probably less > overhead) while prrograms using libc_r will call the new call-gate > with a protocol mor esuited to the new ideas. I guess I don't see why we would _need_ new system calls. A process marks itself as wanting SAs and you put SA hooks in the sleep/wakeup functions. The SA hooks are conditional on the process being marked as wanting SAs. Old binaries using the old libc/libc_r wouldn't be marked as wanting SAs, so they'd continue to operate in the same way. I know I'm simplifying things a bit. Dan Eischen eischen@vigrid.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message