[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [24]   [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 native Linux"

On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 wrote:
> How about allowing the thread root process to do all that junk by giving it
> raw signals - e.g. delivering SUSPEND - and then letting it distribute
> via a pthread_kill?

I don't think that is a good approach from a performance point of view -
it's too similar to what we already do.

HOWEVER, I suspect that pthreads compatibility with signals may require us
to have that thread root process (even if it isn't used for anything
else), because I think that makes our signal handling be POSIX-conformant:
if I remember correctly POSIX does allow the notion of having signals
handled in a special thread that doesn't do anything else. It would still
mean that if you create 'n' pthreads threads, you actually get 'n+1'
kernel threads, but hey, one of them is going to be dormant pretty much
all the time.


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:0.179 / U:0.496 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site