From owner-freebsd-current Wed Dec 16 14:59:06 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26075 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:59:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA26070 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:59:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA02658; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:58:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpdAV2645; Wed Dec 16 22:58:21 1998 Message-ID: <36783B03.446B9B3D@whistle.com> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:58:11 -0800 From: Julian Elischer Organization: Whistle Communications X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.7-RELEASE i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Smith CC: "Richard Seaman, Jr." , Nate Williams , "current@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Linux Threads patches available References: <199812161142.DAA00321@dingo.cdrom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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