Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:39:14 -0500 From: Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> To: Bjorn Tornqvist <bjorn@tornqvist.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD,Posix,Linux Threading - Are they really useable? Message-ID: <20000728003913.K37935@holly.calldei.com> In-Reply-To: <398111DA.443B41F9@tornqvist.net> References: <398111DA.443B41F9@tornqvist.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, July 28, 2000, Bjorn Tornqvist wrote: > PosixThreads are userland threads - if one thread blocks on i/o the > whole process is blocked. Which makes PosixThreads rather useless. That is incorrect. FreeBSD's userland pthread implementation does not block the whole process on I/O. POSIX does not specify this behavior either. > FreeBSD Kernel-threads (dunno what they are called actually) can't be > used natively!? (Searched the archives and found an explanation that the > only way to access normal kernel SMP-thread functionality is to use > LinuxThreads) FreeBSD's kernel threads are for separate threads of execution in the kernel and aren't the same thing as threads for a user process. > LinuxThreads: While they are kernel-threads, if one thread receives an > uncought signal, all threads are killed (as they should be), but the > resulting coredump is useless since it only captures the state of the > last-killed-thread (or process or whatever you want to call it. > LinuxThreads seems like just a big hack...). LinuxThreads on FreeBSD cannot be kernel threads because that would require modifications to our scheduler which simply have not been made. -- |Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> |Save energy: Drive a smaller shell. `------------------------------------ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000728003913.K37935>