From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 27 08:12:15 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390C137B404 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:12:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from h132-197-179-27.gte.com (h132-197-179-27.gte.com [132.197.179.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2AF43F93 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:12:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ak03@gte.com) Received: from kanpc.gte.com (ak03@localhost [127.0.0.1]) h2RGCCAi036101; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:12:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ak03@kanpc.gte.com) Received: (from ak03@localhost) by kanpc.gte.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h2RGCCXq036100; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:12:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:12:12 -0500 From: Alexander Kabaev To: Max Khon Message-Id: <20030327111212.13029dbf.ak03@gte.com> In-Reply-To: <20030327150313.A8897@iclub.nsu.ru> References: <20030327020402.T64602-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> <3E82B795.DDB0C6A4@mindspring.com> <20030327150313.A8897@iclub.nsu.ru> Organization: Verizon Data Services X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11claws42 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-25.4 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 1:1 threading. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:12:16 -0000 On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:03:14 +0600 Max Khon wrote: > Seconded. do you have numbers that clearly show that using Julian's > approach leads to serious performance penalty? Using KSE APIs is not > that difficult as far as I understand, so why we need to introduce > more hacks? > Disagreed. Using KSE APIs _is_ difficult. I think one of the ideas behind 1:1 libth is to keep the code as simple as practical and entangling it too strongly with KSE contradicts with that goal. I certainly hope to see M:N threading project to come to completion in the future, but keep in mind that the architecture this complex will certainly take quite some time to mature and having a reliable fallback option is good. If anything it will provide KSE people with something to compare their implementation with. -- Alexander Kabaev