Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 01:10:23 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se, dyson@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FYI: regarding our rfork(2) Message-ID: <199709190610.BAA00804@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <199709190518.XAA16454@rocky.mt.sri.com> from Nate Williams at "Sep 18, 97 11:18:19 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams said: > > We are actually doing a pure memory sharing operation. We will be sharing > > everything, plan 9 doesn't appear to share the stack. In order to support > > pthreads, (and most thread schemes that I have seen), it is best to allow > > full access to all of the thread stacks. > > Forgive me for being naive, but in all of my experiences with threads > (not much, but lots lately with Java), it seems that sharing the stack > is asking for nothing but trouble. If you need to share memory, > allocate a 'global' shared memory bank that everyone can use, and use > it. > I don't disagree with what you are saying, however, we need to be able to have full access to the stacks in every thread. Of course, we would be wise to create guard page(s) between stacks. -- John dyson@freebsd.org jdyson@nc.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709190610.BAA00804>