From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 25 18:10:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01E0916A4E0; Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:10:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.10.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 522A943D53; Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:10:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (envelope-from xdivac02@eva.fit.vutbr.cz) (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k7PIAUSn015345 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:10:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from xdivac02@localhost) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.13.7/8.13.3/Submit) id k7PIAUek015344; Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:10:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:10:29 +0200 From: Divacky Roman To: Intron is my alias on the Internet Message-ID: <20060825181029.GA15247@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <20060825084755.GA93151@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <20060825133034.jglu4yf9j400sosw@netchild.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 147.229.10.14 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems of New Linuxulator I Have Known X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:10:38 -0000 On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 11:14:44PM +0800, Intron is my alias on the Internet wrote: > 1. Many options of clone(2) are not correctly implemented, some of > which may cause application crash when it wants to clone > memory-independent process. like? > 2. TLS (Thread Local Storage) support in clone(2), set_thread_area(2) > and get_thread_area(2) doesn't conform to Linux 2.6.x, which can > damage stack of Linux application using NPTL (Native POSIX Threads > Library). > > Of course, to obtain the conformation, FreeBSD native GDT must be > rearranged. But Linux NPTL is quite essential for modern Linux > applications. what do you mean that doesnt conform? TLS in linux is implemented using GDT. the only difference between fbsd and linux I can think of is that linux supports 3 gdt entries while fbsd just one. > 3. wakeup_one(9) instead of wakeup(9) should be used for futex(2) to > wake up a single sleeping thread. yes... I agree > 4. Some options of clock_gettime(2) actually can be implemented, though > FreeBSD native implementation is different from Linux's. I might look at it > 5. Code style problems: member naming of structure, macro naming, > function naming, encapsulation for queue(3) and so on. in my code or in the imported code? > In a word, may ORACLE 10g for Linux be able to run under FreeBSD soon. nice :)