From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Sep 9 21:29:24 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA04219 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 9 Sep 1997 21:29:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usr04.primenet.com (tlambert@usr04.primenet.com [206.165.6.204]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04213 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 1997 21:29:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr04.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA10562; Tue, 9 Sep 1997 21:29:15 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199709100429.VAA10562@usr04.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Divert sockets.. To: wong@rogerswave.ca Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 04:29:15 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, kpneal@pobox.com, terry@lambert.olg, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Ken Wong" at Sep 9, 97 08:45:50 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Sex would dictate that it would be neater if it worked between threads. > > if you mean kernel thread and the threads have their own pids. :( No. You obviously haven't heard my lament on kernel threads giving away quantum that belongs to the process when issuing blocking calls, or the unfair competition for non-threaded processes when the number of kernel threads is less than the number of user space threads. Rather than repeat myself, see the -hackers and -current list archives for "threads". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.