Strawman proposal: making libthr default thread implementation?
deischen at freebsd.org
Mon Jul 3 12:41:12 UTC 2006
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>>> - Are there technical features present in libpthread that aren't yet in
>>> libthr, and are required? In the past system/local thread support has
>>> the complaint, but I believe that is now long fixed. This is useful
>>> regardless of a switch.
>> Yes, you have to support PTHREAD_PRIO_PROTECT, PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT
>> mutexes, and SCHED_RR, SCHED_FIFO, and SCHED_SPORADIC scheduling (hopefully
>> not under the restriction that you are a privileged user).
>> If you can those in libthr, I have no objection. However, these are not as
>> easy to do in 1:1.
> Thanks for leeting me know. Other than thee above missing scheduling
> functionality, are you aware of any other missing or substantially
> non-functional features in libthr that are important to this discussion?
No, I think those are what libthr lacks in supporting POSIX.
I think the problem will be getting our 3 kernel schedulers to
More information about the freebsd-threads