Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:22:28 -0800 From: Bill Huey (Hui) <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Nathan Arun <nathan_arun@hotmail.com>, arch@freebsd.org, "Bill Huey (Hui)" <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> Subject: Re: Threads in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20021215052228.GA5677@gnuppy.monkey.org> In-Reply-To: <3DFC06E4.9474F4C2@mindspring.com> References: <F154W6zFoVY2TwDK0qb00016b37@hotmail.com> <3DFC06E4.9474F4C2@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 08:36:52PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > If you are really interested in this, the original KSE discussions > were in usenet news groups from 1994 and again in 1996. One of > the participants was the architect of the threads in Solaris. The > 1:1 model is definitely suboptimal, since it increases kernel/user > boundary crossing frequency significantly. The Linux argument is > that their implementation of this crossing has low overhead on x86 > architectures. My initial complaints about the Solaris/SVR4 model > in the 1994 discussion were in the context of non-use of threads > for an internal product at Novell/USG (the former USL) at the time. They, Linux kernel folks, were complaining about sucky syscall performance recently with the P4 against the P3: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103942289025149&w=2 bill 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?20021215052228.GA5677>