Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 13:36:11 -0600 From: "Richard Seaman, Jr." <dick@tar.com> To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Native thread on JDK 1.1.7 Message-ID: <19990317133610.J93781@tar.com> In-Reply-To: <199903171744.JAA12285@rah.star-gate.com>; from Amancio Hasty on Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:44:45AM -0800 References: <199903171712.KAA10340@mt.sri.com> <199903171744.JAA12285@rah.star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 17, 1999 at 09:44:45AM -0800, Amancio Hasty wrote: > We support Linux kernel threads "natively". Post on current for further > inquiries or > see http://lt.tar.com. > > As for the blanket statement that green threads are faster than kernel threads > . The current > kernel thread implementation is not optimal and it needs to be improved > specially > in the area of locking. If "current kernel thread implementation" means the linux threads port, then three comments: 1) There were some bugs in the spinlock code that are now fixed, as of yesterday. Don't know if this is the locking problem you're referring to. 2) I agree that the linuxthreads approach in general is not "optimal", but its not terrible either (its lots faster than the FreeBSD user threads implementation on the tests I've run). 3) If you have specific suggestions for improvement for the linux threads port, I'm happy to incorporate suggestions. Of course, if your suggestion is for a true FreeBSD non-GPL kernel threads implementation, I agree, but I'm not up to it at this point :) -- Richard Seaman, Jr. email: dick@tar.com 5182 N. Maple Lane phone: 414-367-5450 Chenequa WI 53058 fax: 414-367-5852 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990317133610.J93781>