Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 09:15:04 -0600 (MDT) From: Kenneth Merry <ken@plutotech.com> To: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Cc: toor@dyson.iquest.net, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FYI: regarding our rfork(2) Message-ID: <199709191515.JAA04986@pluto.plutotech.com> In-Reply-To: <199709191417.KAA28139@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> from Garrett Wollman at "Sep 19, 97 10:17:57 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Wollman wrote... > <<On Thu, 18 Sep 1997 20:19:13 -0500 (EST), "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> 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. The 'full sharing' scheme is very > > fast. > > We ought to emulate SGI's sproc(2) system call as well, which does > essentially the same thing. It has the useful feature that it takes > as an argument the address of a function to call, and does all the > stack creation magic internally before calling same. So, the inner > loop of a program I wrote a long time ago on an SGI looks like this: I agree with Garrett... I've done coding under IRIX, and sproc() definitely is a handy system call. The ability to specify a function pointer for the main routine of the thread is especially nice. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@plutotech.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709191515.JAA04986>