From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 4 14:05:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: threads@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from localhost.my.domain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 530EE16A4E1; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:05:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) From: David Xu To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org, Daniel Eischen Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 22:04:52 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20060703101554.Q26325@fledge.watson.org> <200607040612.23493.davidxu@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607042204.52572.davidxu@freebsd.org> Cc: threads@freebsd.org, Robert Watson Subject: Re: Strawman proposal: making libthr default thread implementation? X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:05:17 -0000 On Tuesday 04 July 2006 21:08, Daniel Eischen wrote: > The question was what does libthr lack. The answer is priority > inheritence & protect mutexes, and also SCHED_FIFO, SCHED_RR, and > (in the future) SCHED_SPORADIC scheduling. That is what I stated > earlier in this thread. As other people said, we need performance, these features, as you said, in the future, but I don't think it is more important than performance problem. you have to answer people what they should do when they bought two cpus but works like they only have one, as the major author of libpthread, in the past, you decided to keep silent, ignoring such requirement. also, the signal queue may not work reliably with libpthread, this nightmare appears again.