Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:49:19 -0800
From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: cur{thread/proc}, or not.
Message-ID: <20011111224919.B24623807@overcee.netplex.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <1970.1005517632@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20011111191735.00D053807@overcee.netplex.com.au>, Peter Wemm writ
es:
>
> > [ass'y output of gcc]
> >
> >Ever wonder why the kernel gets slower and slower to compile? Ever
> >compiled a 2.1 or 2.2 kernel on a modern machine and been shocked away by
> >the speed?
> >
> >Count me in the 'curproc considered harmful' camp. (or curthread).
>
> Peters example more than clenches the argument for me, but I also
> wonder if we would not paint ourselves into a corner with the
> cur{proc|thread} stuff if the future ends up being more parallel
> and cluster-oriented.
I believe it would be a lot easier to remove the p/td arguments later
once we know that we dont need them, than to remove them now and discover
later that we do need them and have to go back and figure it all out again.
To answer Robert.. By all means be explicit about creds etc, but lets not
get two different bikesheds^H^H^H^H^H^Hchanges mixed up together.
Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
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?20011111224919.B24623807>