Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:58:11 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: "Richard Seaman, Jr." <lists@tar.com>, Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, "current@freebsd.org" <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Linux Threads patches available Message-ID: <36783B03.446B9B3D@whistle.com> References: <199812161142.DAA00321@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Smith wrote:
>
> For the sake of reestablishing our compatibility with Linux, I think
> that your current code should be strongly considered. As for the
> eventual fate of threading in the FreeBSD kernel, we're still really
> dependant on the availibility of development resources here, either in
> the form of willing and able volunteers or funding which would allow .
The system patch affects the following files:
Index: bin/ps/keyword.c
Index: lib/libc/i386/sys/sigsuspend.S
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux.h
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux_dummy.c
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux_misc.c
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux_proto.h
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux_syscall.h
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux_sysent.c
Index: sys/i386/linux/linux_sysvec.c
Index: sys/i386/linux/syscalls.master
Index: sys/kern/imgact_elf.c
Index: sys/kern/init_main.c
Index: sys/kern/kern_exit.c
Index: sys/kern/kern_fork.c
Index: sys/kern/kern_sig.c
Index: sys/sys/proc.h
Index: sys/sys/signalvar.h
Index: sys/sys/unistd.h
Index: sys/sys/user.h
Index: sys/vm/vm_glue.c
the sys/i386/linux files are not an issue really.
the other changes relate to the moving of a couple of fields out
of the proc/user structures to a separate sharable entity. vis.
+ struct procsig {
+ #define ps_begincopy ps_sigignore
+ sigset_t ps_sigignore; /* Signals being ignored. */
+ sigset_t ps_sigcatch; /* Signals being caught by user. */
+ int ps_flag;
+ struct sigacts ps_sigacts;
+ #define ps_endcopy ps_refcnt
+ int ps_refcnt;
+ int ps_posix;
+ };
+
As I said in other mail. This may not be perfect but if we don't
make a start on threads, we'll never get to the end.. This seems like
a fair place to start. I don't see that implimenting it would be
detrimental to the existing system..
I would vote for an inclusion to allow others to start experimenting
with linux-threads based software,
(note there is now a linux-threads based java JVM.)
thoughts all?
julian
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36783B03.446B9B3D>