Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:48:32 -0800
From:      Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Cc:        eischen@vigrid.com (Daniel M. Eischen), julian@whistle.com, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Threads goals version III 
Message-ID:  <199911050048.QAA49642@rah.star-gate.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 04 Nov 1999 23:14:21 GMT." <199911042314.QAA20206@usr07.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.

What I am think is that for whatever reason there are applications
which want threads to be running at different priorities for instance
"Kaffe" wants or needs threads running at different priorities. 

*Not interested in arguing about whether Kaffe's thread management
is broken or not *.




-- 

 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?199911050048.QAA49642>