From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jul 28 12: 0:16 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from majordomo2.umd.edu (majordomo2.umd.edu [128.8.10.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA4837BC81 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:00:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from culverk@wam.umd.edu) Received: from rac7.wam.umd.edu (root@rac7.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.147]) by majordomo2.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA14627; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:59:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rac7.wam.umd.edu (sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rac7.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA26772; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (culverk@localhost) by rac7.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26768; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:59:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: rac7.wam.umd.edu: culverk owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:59:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Wayne Culver To: Bjorn Tornqvist Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD,Posix,Linux Threading - Are they really useable? In-Reply-To: <398111DA.443B41F9@tornqvist.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Currently as far as I know, there isn't really a way to do this, although much work is being done in -CURRENT to fix this. ================================================================= | Kenneth Culver | FreeBSD: The best NT upgrade | | Unix Systems Administrator | ICQ #: 24767726 | | and student at The | AIM: muythaibxr | | The University of Maryland, | Website: (Under Construction) | | College Park. | http://www.wam.umd.edu/~culverk/| ================================================================= On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Bjorn Tornqvist wrote: > Howdy all, > > I must have missed something very importand w.r.t threads under FreeBSD, > here's what I've come up with during the last week: > > PosixThreads are userland threads - if one thread blocks on i/o the > whole process is blocked. Which makes PosixThreads rather useless. > > 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) > > 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...). > > How do I use normal kernel-threads that will allow all nonblocked > threads in a process to work concurrently, *and* will generate useful > coredumps? > > There must be a way - I've just haven't found any documentation on the > subject. And yes, I must use threads - fork()ing will only give me the > same trouble as LinuxThreads (a process sharing memory with another > won't give a corefile). > > Please help me with this one. > > //Bjorn Tornqvist, West Entertainment Solutions & Technologies AB > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message