[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [27]   [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
   Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:05:19 -0700
From: Mitchell Blank Jr <>
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.

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:0.145 / U:0.744 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site