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>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
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.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200607032125.26156.davidxu>