From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Nov 16 18:42: 5 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD4D37B4C5 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 18:42:04 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id eAH2g1J24568; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 18:42:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 18:42:01 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: frank xu Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: potentially simpler approach than scheduler activations. Message-ID: <20001116184200.L18037@fw.wintelcom.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from bsdman@hotmail.com on Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 10:24:27AM +0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * frank xu [001116 18:25] wrote: > I have readed an article about KSE from jasone, it's cool, can complete > resolve much headache, but you method has same problems as LinuxThread, > jasone already > talked about it, in new FreeBSD 5.0, why can't we have a new way to go? Actually KSE is closer to Linuxthreads than my suggestion from my point of view. Can you elaborate a bit? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message