Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 17:33:12 +1100 (EST) From: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: SSANKARA.IN.oracle.com.ofcmail@in.oracle.com, freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: TimeSlicing in JVM Message-ID: <199802020633.RAA00645@cimlogic.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199802020605.XAA26684@mt.sri.com> from Nate Williams at "Feb 1, 98 11:05:41 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams wrote: > One of the really nasty things in the current green-thread port which > exists on all *nix platforms which don't use kernel threads is that a > single thread can sit in a tight loop and never let go, which means that > if you have one errant thread your entire VM is hosed. This is a *bad* > thing, but I don't see any way around it w/out kernel support. That's not quite true 8-) in all cases. By leaving a timer running, a thread running in a tight loop can be interrupted by a SIGVTALRM and the user-thread kernel can schedule another thread. libc_r does this. So tight loops or thread-hogs are OK provided that the thread doesn't hand on to locked resources. It's non-blocking syscalls that end in tears. Regards, -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@netbsd.org; jb@freebsd.org CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802020633.RAA00645>