From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jul 31 14: 8:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (c421509-a.pinol1.sfba.home.com [24.7.86.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A9F37B409 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:08:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA36157 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:00:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: arch@freebsd.org Subject: threads comment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Y'know, if we'd called the thread a "process" and the thing that has a pid a "task" (or something) the actual functional changes would be a HECK of a lot clearer in the diffs because I have 50k of functional changes and 800+KB of - struct proc *pB + struct thread *td; (just a comment) Actually if we left processes as processes and then created 'super-processes', I think you could start now and still finish first. (so far I have replaced about 4000 instances of struct proc with struct thread (mostly by hand)) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message