From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 21 00:27:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 143A516A4CE; Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:27:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A51E43D5F; Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:27:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net (dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.250]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5L0Qq7Y080473; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:26:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i5L0QpeW003129; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:26:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i5L0QpE7003128; Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:26:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel) Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:26:51 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <20040621002651.GA3086@dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: Cyrille Lefevre cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: Garance A Drosihn cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: -lthr vs. -pthread X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:27:31 -0000 On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 05:07:56PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > this is a question for marcel, > but basically "this may change". In current code the thread_id of the > first thread is set to be equal to the PID. Marcel and I have discussed > reworking the thread_id code and in the new code this will possibly not > be true. Yes. We need to be sure however that we don't break core file creation. Historically the PRSTATUS note in the core file has the process ID. The current thread LWP allocation allows us to put the Thread ID in the note and have as many notes as there are threads. Non-threaded processes will create core files that are compatible with older tools. If we change the LWP allocation, we will break this and should probably use LWPSTATUS notes for the thread states and use the PRSTATUS note for the process state. In any case, this requires modifications to binutils, so needs to be coordinated. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net