Alex wrote: > I was so much enthusiastic about kernel threads implemented in 5.x but > some ugly rumors spoiled my dreams :0) > So I want to get if these rumors are myths or not.
5.x does not implement traditional "kernel threads" like you appear to be thinking about them. Instead, it implements a variation of scheduler activations. Traditional "kernel threads" have a lot of unnecessary overhead problems, including CPU affinity and thread group negaffinity, necessary for increased single application concurrency. See the KSE documentation for more information. > 1. Is it true that kernel threads are more "heavy" than userspace > ones (pthread) and hence application with hundreds of threads will work > evidently slower than that using pthreads due to more switching penalties? Yes and No. See the KSE documentation for more information. > 2. Is it true that even 5.x has no implementation for inter-process > semaphores that are blocking calling thread only not the whole process > as usually in FreeBSD? No, for values of x > 0. See the KSE documentation for more information. -- Terry _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
