Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 6 Sep 1999 21:21:22 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Cc:        Jason Nordwick <nordwick@erdos.askjeeves.com>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: (P)review: sigset_t for more than 32 signals 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9909062120580.2081-100000@salmon.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <199909061833.OAA03865@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Garrett Wollman wrote:

> <<On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 11:06:51 -0700, Jason Nordwick <nordwick@erdos.askjeeves.com> said:
> 
> > Wouldn't you hose uthread performance?  I thought that one of the major
> > benefits it that a context switch in uthreads did not require kernel
> > intervention and a syscall.
> 
> It's true that this would (currently) slow down uthreads.  However, I
> suspect that uthreads may want to do its own signal-mask handling
> anyway (even though it currently doesn't).  On the other hand, if we
> made jmp_buf and struct sigcontext compatible, it could clean up the
> thread scheduler's inner workings.

FWIW, jmp_buf and struct sigcontext are compatibly on the alpha platform.

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 442 9037




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" 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.4.10.9909062120580.2081-100000>