Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:08:00 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: eischen@vigrid.com, julian@whistle.com, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Threads goals version III Message-ID: <199911060008.QAA59237@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 23:00:29 GMT." <199911052300.QAA07809@usr06.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > One could argue that the program should be using a hybrid scheduling > > > class in the kernel in order to achieve this effect, rather than > > > having to have the idea that you would want to schedule seperate > > > kernel schedulable entities within one program. > > > > How to you propose to handle priorieties for different > > "thread thingies" --- "thread thingies" being a yet to > > be defined thread implementation. > > > You mean how will a user space scheduler implement the user space > scheduling class that handles pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(3) calls? > > Or do you mean something deeper, such as "since I'm already thinking > in terms of kernel threads, how will you let me set kernel scheduling > policy for kernel threads, if there aren't any?". > Yes I am thinking in terms of kernel "thread thingies" and my question is what you stated last: "how will you let me set kernel scheduling policy for kernel threads since there aren't any" Example: while working on Kaffe to support kernel threads I had no interface to set the relative thread's priorities. Or maybe I missed something... So at this stage we need concrete models for scheduling assuming that we can get over the hump of defining "thread thingies" at the user land level and at the kernel level. -- Amancio Hasty hasty@rah.star-gate.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911060008.QAA59237>