From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Nov 2 23:26: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3344715505 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 23:26:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA04231 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:25:59 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id IAA84886 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:25:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 374B115505 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 23:25:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from michael.schuster@germany.sun.com) Received: from emuc05-home.Germany.Sun.COM ([129.157.51.10]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA23615 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 23:25:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from germany.sun.com (hacker [129.157.167.97]) by emuc05-home.Germany.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v1.7) with ESMTP id IAA15904 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:25:44 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <381FE37A.736B5D9E@germany.sun.com> Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:25:46 +0100 From: Michael Schuster - TSC SunOS Germany Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Solaris terminology References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Kris Kennaway wrote: > The Solaris terminology seems to be: An illustration can be found here: http://www.sun.com/smcc/solaris-migration/docs/courses/threadsHTML/intro.html#846832 though the artwork leaves to be desired, it may help visualize the concept. > User threads are scheduled over lightweight processes. Lightweight > processors run in the kernel using execution contexts of Kernel Threads. > Each LWP gets 1 and only 1 kernel thread, but you can bind N user threads > to M LWPs, and M LWPs to P processors. > > Kernel Threads can also exist without a LWP, i.e. for purely in-kernel > tasks like interrupt handling and periodic activities. clock thread and memscrubber are an example for this, these are threads ps doesn't show. > LWP and KT are therefore more or less interchangable when you're talking > about what happens to the process, and just depend on which side of the > kernel you're in. I'd rather say "which side of the syscall boundary you're on", but your meaning is clear :-) > Kris cheers Michael -- Michael Schuster / Michael.Schuster@germany.sun.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message