On Friday, July 28, 2000, Nate Williams wrote:
> > That is incorrect. FreeBSD's userland pthread implementation
> > does not block the whole process on I/O. POSIX does not specify
> > this behavior either.
> Actually, sometimes it does (for example when reading from an I/O device
> where select can't be used succesfully).
Hmm. That's true. And that's where uthreads has its main
problems as I understand it.
> > > FreeBSD Kernel-threads (dunno what they are called actually) can't be
> > > used natively!? (Searched the archives and found an explanation that the
> > > only way to access normal kernel SMP-thread functionality is to use
> > > LinuxThreads)
> > FreeBSD's kernel threads are for separate threads of execution
> > in the kernel and aren't the same thing as threads for a user
> > process.
> You're missing the point. He's asking for 'kernel threads' so that
> multiple independant thread of execution for a given 'userland process'
> can be running simulataneously (virtually on a UP, and realistically on
> a MP).
I thought he had seen the term 'kernel threads' in the context
of FreeBSD before, likely in the context of kthread_create() in
the kernel.
--
|Chris Costello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|May the force be... your umbrella! - Plucky Duck
`-------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
