From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun 19 16:32:10 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE35737B401
	for <threads@freebsd.org>; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3723843FE1
	for <threads@freebsd.org>; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:32:10 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.8/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h5JNW6Xh012283;
	Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:32:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 19:32:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0306191623570.41210-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10306191930260.11550-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: threads@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Implementing TLS: step 1
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: deischen@freebsd.org
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 23:32:11 -0000

On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > 
> > It is not just that.  It is the cost of an ldt allocation for
> > each thread.  In libkse, we only need as many LDTs as there
> > are KSEs.  Allocating an ldt per-thread increases thread
> > startup and teardown.
> 
> BTW I think we should make kse_create() create the LDT entry
> and return the new segment descriptor inteh mailbox ....
> 
> (just a thought.. (irrelevant to this discussion))

Sure, I think I agreed to this a while back.  It can
be back-burnered if necessary, though, since we've already
got the code that does the allocations/deallocations.

-- 
Dan Eischen