Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:15:10 +0100
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        "Daniel M. Eischen" <eischen@vigrid.com>
Cc:        Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Threads models and FreeBSD. (Next Step) 
Message-ID:  <25999.941552110@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 02 Nov 1999 09:09:08 EST." <381EF084.C9292297@vigrid.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <381EF084.C9292297@vigrid.com>, "Daniel M. Eischen" writes:
>Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> 
>> In message <381EE0D0.874F6198@vigrid.com>, "Daniel M. Eischen" writes:
>> 
>> >> There is not much point in making a lightweight process facility
>> >> if the resulting processes are not lightweight.
>> >
>> >And quantum is _the_ attribute that makes them lightweight or non
>> >lightweight?  They each share file descriptors, address space, etc.
>> 
>> Lack of overhead is what makes the lightweight.
>> 
>> Keeping track of quanta, accounting permissions or anything else
>> on a "per XXX" basis is "overhead" in this context.
>
>I'll make an assumption that a lightweight process is just going
>to be another proc.  A proc already contains scheduling attributes
>and it seems _extra_ work to make another dereference to get to
>the parents proc scheduling attributes.

Think "context switch"

--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!




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?25999.941552110>