From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 3 06:25:28 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F14537B401 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 06:25:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net (stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.188]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BEE743F85 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 06:25:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0015.cvx22-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.198.15] helo=mindspring.com) by stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (SSLv3:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1915ef-0001hx-00; Thu, 03 Apr 2003 06:25:26 -0800 Message-ID: <3E8C437F.2C81306D@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 06:21:52 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Igor Sysoev References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: b1a02af9316fbb217a47c185c03b154d40683398e744b8a4e0dfef6ba63c3462089ef6d124c34f6e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 14:25:28 -0000 I have to ask: Why is it so important to people that the libthr performance gains be impossible to achieve without use of the 1:1 model, rather than a modification of libc_r, or avoidance of existing kernel latencies? -- Terry