From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Oct 31 19:34:17 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 3E8D314A16 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 19:34:14 -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 EAA02089 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 04:34:14 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id EAA70020 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 04:34:13 +0100 (MET) Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FB31563D for ; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 19:32:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: (from eischen@localhost) by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.8.7/PCNet) id WAA18647; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:31:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 22:31:41 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen Message-Id: <199911010331.WAA18647@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, julian@whistle.com Subject: Re: Threads goals version II Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > 6/ (contentious) multiple theads should be bound to within the resource > limits of the single process. Multiple processes/LWPs should be allowed to have their own quantum and not count towards the [parent] process quantum, right? > 9/ there exists a set of primatives that allow threads to influence the > in-process scheduling between themselves. This should also be across multiple LWPs also. Perhaps we need to state our terminology - I'm not sure if this is what you meant. > 14/ your goals here.. The ability for the threads library to protect internal data structures to be safe from priority inversion problems when using multiple LWPs. Dan Eischen eischen@vigrid.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message