>for i in file >do > md5sum $i & >done The trouble with this, and your proposed successor, is that they fork off N processes, whereas I want there to only be two working processes, one for each core we have. Any more than that represents a slowdown, not a speedup, for a CPU-intensive task like MD5, assuming the embedded system could even survive that number of forks.
>When you say "threaded" here, are you talking -lpthread? Because you were >talking about merely using fork before... No, just pure fork. No need for pthreads, the only passed-back information is a success/fail status code, which exit() can handle just fine. I tend to use "threaded" in its more generic sense, since I spent a lot of time coding that kind of stuff on a platform that didn't have any sort of what we now call threads. (It had fabulous asynchronous I/O, though. All of stat, open, creat, close, read, write, ioctl, wait, nap, were optionally asynchronous. All network activity utilized only the above calls, too.) The most effective coding style was event-driven, with multiple threads of activity going on in parallel. -- Jim _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
