Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:49:40 -0700 | | From | Larry McVoy <> | | Subject | Re: Alan Cox quote? |
| |
On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 08:01:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote: > The funny thing here, Larry, is that to most people (who aren't OS gurus), > Linux' clone or Plan 9's rfork *are* threads. > > I certainly agree that you don't necessarily need two different kernel- > level kinds of things, but really, most of the time when people talk about > threads
Great, then we are in violent agreement on the single abstraction. On the second part, I stand by my previous statements that threads or processes should be used sparingly.
All I'm doing is trying to counter all the "threads are great" hype. This is a pretty intelligent pile of people but there are also a fair number of people who read this list looking for nuggets of information. If they walk away going "(a) Linux has a cool threading model, and (b) I should only use threads if I absolutely have to do so and even then if there are more than there are CPUs I'm probably making a mistake", if they get that message, that's a good thing, IMHO. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |