lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    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 <mitch@sfgoth.com>
    Cc: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
    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.

    Mark
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.021 / U:146.872 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site