Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jul 1999 23:57:59 +0300 (IDT) | From | Alon Ziv <> | Subject | Re: kernel thread support - LWP's |
| |
On 18 Jul 1999, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Alon Ziv <alonz@cs.technion.ac.il> writes: > > > If we use the trampoline approach, we get: > > > > Original thread: > > - allocate new stack > > - new_tid = clone(...) > > - waitpid(new_tid, WUNTRACED) > > - (update thread tables &c) > > - kill(new_tid, SIGCONT) > > New thread: > > - sched_setscheduler(new_tid, ...) > > - kill (new_tid, SIGSTOP) > > Even worse. Since the manager has to know when the > schedparam/scheduler calls fail it the child must communicate this > somehow to the manager. And this is absolutely unnecessary since the > manager could make the calls itself. > No, in this case the new thread will just put the error code in its own per-thread header and do an exit(-1) instead of the kill. Same overhead.
-az
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------- . __ | Phone: +972 3 5340753 (home), +972 3 9685882 (work) _| / | email: alonz@usa.net / | /_ Alon Ziv | smail: 33 Ha-Rama St., Ganey Tiqwah 55900, Israel ------------------------+---------------------------------------------------- <<<(((this place reserved for that ultra-wise oneliner I haven't found.)))>>>
- 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/
| |