Thinking about kqueue's and pthread_cond_wait
eischen at vigrid.com
Thu Feb 11 00:11:08 UTC 2010
On Feb 10, 2010, at 3:06 PM, Alfred Perlstein <alfred at freebsd.org>
> * Daniel Eischen <deischen at freebsd.org> [100210 12:01] wrote:
>> I strongly disagree. Using mutexes and condition variables in the
>> proper way is not as easy as it sounds, let alone trying to mix
>> them as userland thingies into kqueue.
>> I will strongly oppose this...
> Well then you "win". I have no desire to engage in such discussion.
> I do hope that when you see this facility leveraged elsewhere for
> an application that you reflect on this conversation and think back
> on it the next time an opportunity presents itself to lead in
Don't misunderstand me, I just don't think running around the tree and
adapting all the userland leaves to kqueue-isize them is the right
approach. IMHO, it's better to extend the kqueue/kevent mechanism to
allow a generic object to be added to the event list and the kqueue to
be signaled from userland. All the pthread and semaphore functions
are userland operations that also rely on userland structures anyway.
More information about the freebsd-threads