Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 21:25:25 +0800 From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org, Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> Cc: threads@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Strawman proposal: making libthr default thread implementation? Message-ID: <200607032125.26156.davidxu@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607030838190.6102@sea.ntplx.net> References: <20060703101554.Q26325@fledge.watson.org> <20060703133454.L57091@fledge.watson.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607030838190.6102@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 03 July 2006 20:40, Daniel Eischen wrote: > No, I think those are what libthr lacks in supporting POSIX. > I think the problem will be getting our 3 kernel schedulers to > support them. it is mutex code and priority propagating which is already supported by turnstile code, in theory, it is not depended on scheduler.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200607032125.26156.davidxu>