Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Anonymous
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Daniel J. O'Connor" writes: : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work : could they? :) In a nutshell, it appears to basically do an rfork. It then becomes like any other process that is interrupted in the kernel... Warner To

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Warner Losh
In message "Daniel J. O'Connor" writes: : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work : could they? :) In a nutshell, it appears to basically do an rfork. It then becomes like any other process that is interrupted in the kernel... Warner To Unsubscribe: send m

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Anonymous
Warner Losh wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Daniel J. O'Connor" writ es: > : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads wor k > : could they? :) > > Looks like it just does a fork like thing so it can do context > switches... > > Warner When I looke

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Peter Wemm
Warner Losh wrote: > In message "Daniel J. O'Connor" writ es: > : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads wor k > : could they? :) > > Looks like it just does a fork like thing so it can do context > switches... > > Warner When I looked last time, it was

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Anonymous
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Warner Losh wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Daniel J. O'Connor" writes: > : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work > : could they? :) > > Looks like it just does a fork like thing so it can do context > switches... To be more

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Julian Elischer
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Warner Losh wrote: > In message "Daniel J. O'Connor" > writes: > : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work > : could they? :) > > Looks like it just does a fork like thing so it can do context > switches... To be more precise, it shou

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Anonymous
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Daniel J. O'Connor" writes: : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work : could they? :) Looks like it just does a fork like thing so it can do context switches... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "un

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Warner Losh
In message "Daniel J. O'Connor" writes: : I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work : could they? :) Looks like it just does a fork like thing so it can do context switches... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebs

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Anonymous
: :I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work :could they? :) : :I sort of grasp the idea but I'm wondering what passes for context switches and :stuff like that.. What does the switching between threads etc? Or am I :completely off track? : :--- :Daniel O'Connor

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Matthew Dillon
: :I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel threads work :could they? :) : :I sort of grasp the idea but I'm wondering what passes for context switches and :stuff like that.. What does the switching between threads etc? Or am I :completely off track? : :--- :Daniel O'Connor s

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Anonymous
On 28-Jun-99 Matthew Dillon wrote: > I think we desparately need a kernel threads implementation. *Any* > implementation, so we can start messing around with it! Even if it isn't > the one we eventually choose. I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel thr

Re: "restricted" kernel threads implementation from NetBSD via n

1999-06-28 Thread Daniel J. O'Connor
On 28-Jun-99 Matthew Dillon wrote: > I think we desparately need a kernel threads implementation. *Any* > implementation, so we can start messing around with it! Even if it isn't > the one we eventually choose. I don't suppose someone could post an explanation of how kernel thre