From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jul 5 23:54:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (c421509-a.pinol1.sfba.home.com [24.7.86.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A115637B405 for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 23:54:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (InterJet.elischer.org [192.168.1.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA31142; Fri, 6 Jul 2001 01:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3B455C0C.C5E8197C@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 23:34:52 -0700 From: Julian Elischer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386) X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Wemm Cc: Jason Evans , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: Kernel thread system nomenclature. References: <20010706010723.8626D3809@overcee.netplex.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Peter Wemm wrote: > > Jason Evans wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 02:16:16PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: [...] > > I think there is a clear argument for #1 to be "struct proc". I don't much > > care what #2, #3, and #4 are called. > > > > I am of the rather strong opinion that calling #3/#4 "struct proc" is a bad > > idea in the long run. Yes, it would reduce the diffs, but it would be > > terribly confusing to those who weren't versed with the development history > > of KSEs. > > Also keep in mind that netbsd use 'struct lwp *' for #3/#4 (SA has these > combined into one entity). If there is an easy way to not be gratuitously > different I think it would be worth it. Also comments by several others.. Ok so here's how it looks to me now: (still not final) #1 struct proc (decided) #2 struct schedgrp ,lpwg (lwp-group), prigrp (priority-group) subproc (subprocess) #3 struct upctx (upcall-context), virtcpu, thrdslot (thread slot) #4 struct lwp (decided) usually the 'lwp' will be passed around so diffs to NetBSD will be minimalised. my favourites are: proc, subproc, lwcpu, lwp lwps are parcelled out to lwcpus to run when the appropriate subproc is scheduled. -- +------------------------------------+ ______ _ __ | __--_|\ Julian Elischer | \ U \/ / hard at work in | / \ julian@elischer.org +------>x USA \ a very strange | ( OZ ) \___ ___ | country ! +- X_.---._/ presently in San Francisco \_/ \\ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message