Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 18:10:00 +1100 (EST) From: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> To: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert) Cc: jb@cimlogic.com.au, dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, perlsta@sunyit.edu, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: implementing linux's clone() Message-ID: <199802050710.SAA08126@cimlogic.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199802050653.XAA08485@usr08.primenet.com> from Terry Lambert at "Feb 5, 98 06:53:20 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > Without quantum affinity, thread group affinity, the value of using > kernel threading vs. call conversion threading is higly questionable, > IMO. For FreeBSD, though, kernel threading avoids the problem with drivers not supporting a non-blocking interface. > Personally, I would be *very* happy to see even a user space pthreads > brought up to draft 10 (the final POSIX draft). No, not draft 10. ISO/IEC 9945-1 ANSI/IEEE Std 1003.1 Second Edition 1996-012-12 as published. I have that sitting on the desk next to me, so I'll update the user-space threads to match the kernel thread implementation. I need to continue using the user-space threads on FreeBSD/Alpha for the forseeable future (unless someone wants to whack kernel threads into NetBSD's alpha kernel). Regards, -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@netbsd.org; jb@freebsd.org CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802050710.SAA08126>