Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:25:46 +0100
From:      Michael Schuster - TSC SunOS Germany <michael.schuster@germany.sun.com>
To:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Solaris terminology
Message-ID:  <381FE37A.736B5D9E@germany.sun.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911021335290.73778-100000@hub.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote:

> The Solaris terminology seems to be:

An illustration can be found here:
http://www.sun.com/smcc/solaris-migration/docs/courses/threadsHTML/intro.html#846832

though the artwork leaves to be desired, it may help visualize the
concept.

> User threads are scheduled over lightweight processes. Lightweight
> processors run in the kernel using execution contexts of Kernel Threads.
> Each LWP gets 1 and only 1 kernel thread, but you can bind N user threads
> to M LWPs, and M LWPs to P processors.
> 
> Kernel Threads can also exist without a LWP, i.e. for purely in-kernel
> tasks like interrupt handling and periodic activities.

clock thread and memscrubber are an example for this, these are threads
ps doesn't show.

> LWP and KT are therefore more or less interchangable when you're talking
> about what happens to the process, and just depend on which side of the
> kernel you're in.

I'd rather say "which side of the syscall boundary you're on", but your
meaning is clear :-)

> Kris

cheers
Michael
-- 
Michael Schuster          / Michael.Schuster@germany.sun.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?381FE37A.736B5D9E>