[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: SCO: "thread creation is about a thousand times faster than on
       Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:05:19 -0700
    From: Mitchell Blank Jr <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

    Mark Kettenis wrote:
    > The current draft for IEEE Std. 1003.1-200x says:
    > "A call to any exec function from a process with more than one thread
    > results in all threads being terminated and the new executable image
    > being loaded and executed. No destructor functions shall be called."

    Grumble... and I suppose a failed execve() needs to return an error
    to that one thread, but a succesful one needs to atomically destroy all
    the other threads... And HOW is this supposed to be implemented?

    Well, that isn't explicitly demanded by the standard, but I don't
    thing any other behaviour would make much sense.

    The previous version of the standard had this right - just leave it
    undefined and let the OS try to do something sane. Hopefully this part
    will get nixed before the final revision.

    Are you sure? I don't have a copy of ISO/IEC 9945-1:1996 (the
    official designation of the 1996 edition which includes threads
    (1003.1c-1995)), but there is nothing in the draft that indicates that
    this is a new requirement. And it won't be "nixed" if none of the
    kernel people object to it. The requirement makes sense to me, from a
    user standpoint.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.020 / U:22.500 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site