Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 22:36:31 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc_r/uthread pthread_private.h uthread_yield.c Message-ID: <199803080536.WAA06540@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199803080529.QAA10869@cimlogic.com.au> References: <199803080523.WAA06336@mt.sri.com> <199803080529.QAA10869@cimlogic.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > that it will all just come out in the wash. Kernel threads aren't > > > light weight, though. > > > > If kernel threads aren't light-weight, then what differentiates them > > from processes? > > Shared address space. You can do that easily enough know with mmap'd files, and or SYSV shmem. It would seem to me that heavy-weight threads don't buy you anything that you can't already do know. Heck, someone could write up a library that does that already, making the details hidden like the user-land pthreads library. It seems to me we're checking off a box on someone's list of features w/out any regard to the usefulness of that feature. :( Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199803080536.WAA06540>