Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 23:15:18 -0400 From: Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> To: Arthur Munn <netbsdadvocate@hotmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.0 to have pthreads? Message-ID: <20010401231518.A54826@electricjellyfish.net> In-Reply-To: <F1410QUUBPcZi71mrvo00007bba@hotmail.com>; from netbsdadvocate@hotmail.com on Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 11:09:15PM -0400 References: <F1410QUUBPcZi71mrvo00007bba@hotmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 11:09:15PM -0400, Arthur Munn wrote: > hello all, I was told by a friend that FreeBSD 5.0 is going to be sporting > *real* pthreads, I was immediatley very excited and I want to know if this > is true, if anyone knows I would really like to have it verified/dismissed. first of all, you have to define 'real pthreads'. freebsd has a perfectly good implimentation of pthreads right now, it just happens to be implimented in userspace. there is also a port of linuxthreads which uses rfork underneath, so gets you process based threads, which gives you many of the advantages of kernel threads, but is rather heavyweight. there is also the KSE project, which is probably what you're talking about. it's intent is to impliment kernel threads in a much more efficient and scalable manner than the rfork based style. check out http://www.freebsd.org/~jasone/kse for details. this project was originally intended for FreeBSD 5.0, but will likely not be completed in time. at the moment i believe it is waiting on the current proc locking work to be completed before any code will be checked in. -- garrett rooney Unix was not designed to stop you from rooneg@electricjellyfish.net doing stupid things, because that would http://electricjellyfish.net/ stop you from doing clever things. 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?20010401231518.A54826>