From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Oct 29 17:56:36 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83CF316A416;
	Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:56:36 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D25D643D6D;
	Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:56:29 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Received: from [192.168.254.11] (phobos.samsco.home [192.168.254.11])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k9THskWL031503;
	Sun, 29 Oct 2006 10:54:51 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Message-ID: <4544EAE6.2030406@samsco.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 10:54:46 -0700
From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US;
	rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20060910 SeaMonkey/1.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
References: <45425D92.8060205@elischer.org>
	<200610281132.21466.davidxu@freebsd.org>
	<20061028105454.S69980@fledge.watson.org>
	<20061028194125.GL30707@riyal.ugcs.caltech.edu>
	<20061028204357.A83519@fledge.watson.org>
	<200610290344.k9T3itAw054920@apollo.backplane.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0610290048530.15683@sea.ntplx.net>
	<4544380E.4010604@samsco.org>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0610290845150.17696@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0610290845150.17696@sea.ntplx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed 
	version=3.1.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org
Cc: Paul Allen <nospam@ugcs.caltech.edu>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org,
	Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>,
	Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Subject: Re: Comments on the  KSE option
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:56:36 -0000

Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Scott Long wrote:
> 
>> Daniel Eischen wrote:
>>> Actually, that's not quite true.  I assume you know the thing you
>>> left out:  system scope threads compete against all the other
>>> system scope threads in the system (from all applications, not
>>> just within one application).
>>>
>>
>> All this debate about the merits of process scope threads and fair
>> scheduling is great.  But tell me, who was working on making this stuff
>> work well quickly and reliably (i.e. work well)?  No one!  I don't care
>> what AIX or Solaris or what else may or may not have done, who was 
>> making this work well for FreeBSD?  Having a slow a thread subsystem is
>> a serious detriment, no matter how nice and flexible it looks on paper.
> 
> Process scope threads work well in libpthread.  System scope
> threads work well and fast in libthr.  I think most people's
> concept of "fast" as applied to process scope threads doesn't
> quite mesh well with the fact that process scheduling is fair.
> 

Btw, why is PTHREADS_INVARIANTS still enabled on -STABLE branches?  We
don't have kernel INVARIANTS enabled there, so I don't understand why
libpthread needs to be different.

Scott