Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 31 Oct 1999 23:18:16 -0500 (EST)
From:      Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net>
To:        Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
Cc:        Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, julian@whistle.com
Subject:   Re: Threads goals  version II
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910312317180.29073-100000@picnic.mat.net>
In-Reply-To: <199911010413.VAA15024@mt.sri.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, Nate Williams wrote:

> > > 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?
> 
> As I read that, no.  A multi-threaded process shouldn't be given any
> more 'resources' than a single-threaded process.

With the notable exception that a multithreaded process must be able to be
concurrently running on multiple processors simpultaneously, right?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Robey                | Interests include C programming, Electronics,
213 Lakeside Dr. Apt. T-1  | communications, and signal processing.
Greenbelt, MD 20770        | I run picnic.mat.net: FreeBSD-current(i386) and
(301) 220-2114             |       jaunt.mat.net : FreeBSD-current(Alpha)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------





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.BSF.4.10.9910312317180.29073-100000>