Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 Dec 1998 17:22:01 +0900 (JST)
From:      Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To:        Tony Kimball <alk@pobox.com>
Cc:        tlambert@primenet.com, peter@netplex.com.au, gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, marcelk@stack.nl, smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Pthreads and SMP
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95LJ1.1b3.981208170921.370A-100000@sv01.cet.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <13932.22397.480607.310372@avalon.east>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Tony Kimball wrote:

> Quoth Terry Lambert on Mon, 7 December:
> : One reason I haven't piped up on this (I *do* have the scheduler
> : changes for CPU affinity working, actually) is that apart from
> : that, there's still the issue of the per thread stack.
> : 
> : I am not very satisfied nor happy with the allocation of stack in
> : the same VM space in each thread (for reasons of stack autogrowth),
> : and I would want to address that before anything else.
> 
> Yikes!  Surely you are not proposing to place the stacks of 
> distinct threads in distinct address spaces?!  This would
> impact application portability negatively.

I think he's talking about stacks for kernel execution contexts (kernel
threads).

> : Finally, apart from affinity, kernel threads are relatively useless
> : as an implementation without cooperative user space scheduling.
> : The only OS which I am aware of having addressed these isses at
> : this point is Solaris.
> 
> Give me 1-1 threads, thank you very much, and I will be most
> happy to manage my own task pools, as this is the only way to write
> portably in the current state of play.  'Relatively useless' is an
> overstatement of the case.  Relatively useless, perhaps, for the case
> of Solaris applications relying upon the peculiarities of Solaris
> thread semantics.

Do you mean peculiarities that require you to do things like...?

#ifdef SOLARIS25
	thr_setconcurrency(2);
#endif

Digital UNIX is m-n and doesn't have these peculiarities and I thought
they were resolved in Solaris 2.6.

Regards,


Mike Hancock


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95LJ1.1b3.981208170921.370A-100000>