Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 14:40:51 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com> Cc: peter.jeremy@auss2.alcatel.com.au, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: flock + kernel threads bug Message-ID: <19990423064055.6B0DA1F49@spinner.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 22 Apr 1999 14:48:02 -0400." <199904221848.OAA06740@lor.watermarkgroup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Luoqi Chen wrote: > I've been thinking about a more drastic one, store the same PID in the > threads' proc structure. PID is no more than a name of a process in the > userland, and in userland we see all the threads as the same process. > I don't think we really need a thread id, the threads are anonymous. > Inside the kernel, the threads or processes are still named by their > (struct proc *) pointer, so there won't be any confusion. selwakeup() is keyed from pid, not 'struct proc *' and is rather dependent on these being unique... Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990423064055.6B0DA1F49>