Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:20:17 -0400 | From | Mark Mielke <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1 |
| |
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 05:21:35PM -0700, Bill Huey wrote: > ... > The incorrect example where you outline what you think is a M:N call > conversion is (traditional async wrappers instead of upcalls), is something > that don't want to be a future technical strawman that folks create in > this community to attack M:N threading. It may very well still have > legitimacy in the same way that part of the performance of the JVM depends > on accessibilty to a thread's ucontext and run state, which seem to be > initial oversight (unknown reason) when this was originally conceived. > Those are kind of things are what I'm most worried about that eventually > hurt what application folks are on building on top of Linux and its > kernel facilities. > ... > That's the core of my rant and it took quite a while to write up. ;)
My part in the rant (really somebody else's rant...) is that if kernel threads can be made to out-perform current implementations of M:N threading, then all that has really been proven is that current M:N practices are not fully optimal. 1:1 in an N:N system is just one face of M:N in an N:N system. A fully functional M:N system _may choose_ to allow M to equal N.
Worst possibly cases that I expect to see from people experimenting with this stuff and having a 1:1 system that out-performs commonly available M:N systems: 1) The M:N people innovate, potentially using the new technology made available from the 1:1 people, making a _better_ M:N system 2) The 1:1 system is better, and people use it.
As long as they all use a POSIX, or other standard interface, there isn't a problem.
If the changes to the kernel made by the 1:1 people are bad, they will be stopped by Linus and many other people, probably including yourself... :-)
In any case, I see the 1:1 vs. M:N as a distraction from the *actual* enhancements being designed, which seem to be, support for cheaper kernel threads, something that benefits both parties.
mark
-- mark@mielke.cc/markm@ncf.ca/markm@nortelnetworks.com __________________________ . . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder |\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ | | | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
- 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/
| |