atom feed76 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-archRe: Threads
FromSent OnAttachments
Daniel M. EischenNov 20, 1999 8:12 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 20, 1999 8:30 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 20, 1999 8:37 pm 
Daniel M. EischenNov 20, 1999 9:02 pm 
Nate WilliamsNov 20, 1999 9:14 pm 
Daniel M. EischenNov 20, 1999 9:21 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 20, 1999 9:25 pm 
Nate WilliamsNov 20, 1999 9:27 pm 
Daniel M. EischenNov 20, 1999 9:40 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 20, 1999 10:58 pm 
Daniel M. EischenNov 21, 1999 5:40 am 
Chuck RobeyNov 22, 1999 4:30 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 22, 1999 7:57 pm 
Chuck RobeyNov 22, 1999 8:11 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 22, 1999 8:38 pm 
Chuck RobeyNov 22, 1999 9:40 pm 
Daniel EischenNov 23, 1999 4:19 am 
Jason EvansNov 23, 1999 11:30 am 
Daniel M. EischenNov 23, 1999 1:22 pm 
Chuck RobeyNov 23, 1999 9:06 pm 
Daniel EischenNov 23, 1999 9:49 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 23, 1999 10:47 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 23, 1999 11:33 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 23, 1999 11:46 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 24, 1999 2:03 am 
Daniel C. SobralNov 24, 1999 3:19 am 
Daniel C. SobralNov 24, 1999 3:51 am 
Daniel M. EischenNov 24, 1999 6:03 am 
Richard Seaman, Jr.Nov 24, 1999 6:33 am 
Matthew DillonNov 24, 1999 10:35 am 
Daniel EischenNov 24, 1999 11:02 am 
Matthew DillonNov 24, 1999 11:05 am 
Anthony KimballNov 24, 1999 11:25 am 
Daniel EischenNov 24, 1999 11:28 am 
Matthew DillonNov 24, 1999 11:41 am 
Matthew DillonNov 24, 1999 11:47 am 
Julian ElischerNov 24, 1999 11:54 am 
Louis A. MamakosNov 24, 1999 11:57 am 
Matthew DillonNov 24, 1999 12:00 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 24, 1999 12:20 pm 
Anthony KimballNov 24, 1999 12:47 pm 
Doug RabsonNov 24, 1999 2:05 pm 
Jason EvansNov 24, 1999 2:16 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 24, 1999 2:28 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 24, 1999 2:40 pm 
Richard Seaman, Jr.Nov 24, 1999 3:39 pm 
Jason EvansNov 24, 1999 9:24 pm 
Jason EvansNov 24, 1999 10:03 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 25, 1999 1:08 am 
Julian ElischerNov 25, 1999 1:33 am 
Daniel M. EischenNov 25, 1999 3:08 am 
Doug RabsonNov 26, 1999 3:01 am 
Jordan K. HubbardNov 26, 1999 10:33 am 
Doug RabsonNov 26, 1999 12:15 pm 
Matthew DillonNov 27, 1999 7:38 pm 
Arun SharmaNov 27, 1999 8:57 pm 
Matthew DillonNov 28, 1999 8:41 am 
Arun SharmaNov 28, 1999 10:25 am 
Matthew DillonNov 28, 1999 5:06 pm 
Nate WilliamsNov 29, 1999 8:10 am 
Matthew DillonNov 29, 1999 8:21 am 
Nate WilliamsNov 29, 1999 8:29 am 
Matthew DillonNov 29, 1999 9:05 am 
Matthew DillonNov 29, 1999 9:19 am 
Daniel M. EischenNov 29, 1999 9:28 am 
Nate WilliamsNov 29, 1999 10:29 am 
Julian ElischerNov 29, 1999 11:23 am 
Nate WilliamsNov 29, 1999 1:39 pm 
Chuck RobeyNov 29, 1999 6:06 pm 
Daniel M. EischenNov 29, 1999 7:46 pm 
Chuck RobeyNov 29, 1999 9:01 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 29, 1999 9:34 pm 
Chuck RobeyNov 29, 1999 10:09 pm 
Daniel M. EischenNov 30, 1999 4:02 am 
Jason EvansNov 30, 1999 2:25 pm 
Julian ElischerNov 30, 1999 2:42 pm 
Subject:Re: Threads
From:Daniel Eischen (eisc@vigrid.com)
Date:Nov 24, 1999 11:28:50 am
List:org.freebsd.freebsd-arch

On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:

:In this context, what is a task? Something similar to a kernel thread? :If there are N (user-level POSIX) threads in an application, how many :tasks are there?

N. A task is simply an execution context for the scheduler. That's it, nothing special. The scheduler need only know about tasks and doesn't really have to know about meta-data such as (except for the MMU context) data stored in Processes, nor does it really need to know what *kind* of task it is messing with.

Simplicity is the best solution.

:> complicates the code. We can trivially use the existing priority :> scheme to schedule interrupt tasks (threads). : :The kernel doesn't know at what priority the threads run, so how can :it effectively schedule them? : :Dan Eischen

If you have one Task == one Thread, the priority is in the Task structure, so the kernel would know. Obviously the scheduler must know or it can't properly schedule the execution context.

So everytime the UTS wants to run a new thread, it has to make a call to the kernel to tell it what it's current priority is? And the kernel is suppose to be able to handle SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR queueing? And the kernel will now if a task holds a critical resource and will be able to avoid priority inversions?

I think we want to avoid having the kernel know too much about each thread. It is something that is more easily handled in the threads library.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message