Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:50:02 -0700 | From | "Nate Tuck" <> | Subject | Re: kernel thread support - LWP's |
| |
At 12:31 AM 7/15/99 -0600, Larry McVoy wrote: >Second, for those rare cases where they actually do cost too much, >that's only on crappy operating systems. The last time I checked, Linux >process context switches were faster than Solaris LWP context switches. >So much for that argument.
Larry,
Since you've obviously talked to a lot of good people on this, I was wondering if you could talk about the only issue I haven't heard you bring up which is frequently brought up by the LWP/user-thread-scheduler folks. What about kernel run-queue length? It seems that I've heard the argument made that LWP's keep you from spending a long time in the kernel scheduler, which I could see might actually be a good thing.
nate
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |