Re: Threads are processes that share more
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 01:10:31AM +0200, J . A . Magallon wrote:
>
> On 20010621 Stephen Satchell wrote:
> >
> >By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for "thread"
> >is "lightweight process".
> >
>
> In linux. Perhaps this the fault.
> In IRIX, you have sprocs and threads. sprocs have independent pids and you
> can control what you share (mappings, fd table...). Threads group under
> same pid.
I think that's accurate.
> Linux chose the sproc way...
That's not accurate. The Linux way is an infinitely nicer architecture.
For each thing that is shareable you have code like
vm_fork(... flags)
{
if (flags & VM_SHARE) return;
do the work to fork the data structure
}
In other words, it's designed to be shared. The IRIX stuff is disgusting,
you really don't want anything to do with sproc().It _sounds_ like they
are the same but they aren't - for example, with sproc you get your very
own TLB miss handler. Doesn't that sound special?
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
On 20010621 Stephen Satchell wrote: > >By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for "thread" >is "lightweight process". > In linux. Perhaps this the fault. In IRIX, you have sprocs and threads. sprocs have independent pids and you can control what you share (mappings, fd table...). Threads group under same pid. Linux chose the sproc way... -- J.A. Magallon # Let the source be with you... mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Mandrake release 8.1 (Cooker) for i586 Linux werewolf 2.4.5-ac15 #2 SMP Sun Jun 17 02:12:45 CEST 2001 i686 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
On 20010621 Stephen Satchell wrote: By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for thread is lightweight process. In linux. Perhaps this the fault. In IRIX, you have sprocs and threads. sprocs have independent pids and you can control what you share (mappings, fd table...). Threads group under same pid. Linux chose the sproc way... -- J.A. Magallon # Let the source be with you... mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Mandrake release 8.1 (Cooker) for i586 Linux werewolf 2.4.5-ac15 #2 SMP Sun Jun 17 02:12:45 CEST 2001 i686 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 01:10:31AM +0200, J . A . Magallon wrote:
On 20010621 Stephen Satchell wrote:
By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for thread
is lightweight process.
In linux. Perhaps this the fault.
In IRIX, you have sprocs and threads. sprocs have independent pids and you
can control what you share (mappings, fd table...). Threads group under
same pid.
I think that's accurate.
Linux chose the sproc way...
That's not accurate. The Linux way is an infinitely nicer architecture.
For each thing that is shareable you have code like
vm_fork(... flags)
{
if (flags VM_SHARE) return;
do the work to fork the data structure
}
In other words, it's designed to be shared. The IRIX stuff is disgusting,
you really don't want anything to do with sproc().It _sounds_ like they
are the same but they aren't - for example, with sproc you get your very
own TLB miss handler. Doesn't that sound special?
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
I thought one only refers to LWPs when talking about kernel level threads not user-space ones? Ognen On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Stephen Satchell wrote: > By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for "thread" > is "lightweight process". > > Satch -- Ognen Duzlevski Plant Biotechnology Institute National Research Council of Canada Bioinformatics team - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
At 08:48 PM 6/20/01 +0200, Martin Devera wrote: >BTW is not possible to implement threads as subset of process ? >Like thread list pointed to from task_struct. It'd contain >thread_structs plus another scheduler's data. >The thread could be much smaller than process. > >Probably there is another problem I don't see, I'm just >currious whether can it work like this .. Threads would then run, as a group, at the priority of the process, and then by priority within the process thread group. To be truely useful, threads need to be able to have their run priority divorced from the priority of the spawning process. By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for "thread" is "lightweight process". Satch - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
> Threads are processes that share more BTW is not possible to implement threads as subset of process ? Like thread list pointed to from task_struct. It'd contain thread_structs plus another scheduler's data. The thread could be much smaller than process. Probably there is another problem I don't see, I'm just currious whether can it work like this .. devik - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, bert hubert wrote: > Rounding up, it may be worth repeating what I think Alan said some months > ago: > > Threads are processes that share more ... and for absolute majority of programmers additional shared objects mean additional fsckup sources. I don't trust them to write correct async code. OK, so I don't trust the majority of programmers to find their dicks if you take their Visual Masturbation Aid++ away, but that's another story - I'm talking about otherwise clued people, not burger-flippers armed with Foo For Complete Dummies in 24 Hours. > And if we just keep bearing that out to everybody a lot of the myths will go > away. I would suggest that the pthreads manpages get this attitude. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Threads are processes that share more
Rounding up, it may be worth repeating what I think Alan said some months ago: Threads are processes that share more And if we just keep bearing that out to everybody a lot of the myths will go away. I would suggest that the pthreads manpages get this attitude. Regards, bert hubert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Services Trilab The Technology People 'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Threads are processes that share more
Rounding up, it may be worth repeating what I think Alan said some months ago: Threads are processes that share more And if we just keep bearing that out to everybody a lot of the myths will go away. I would suggest that the pthreads manpages get this attitude. Regards, bert hubert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Services Trilab The Technology People 'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, bert hubert wrote: Rounding up, it may be worth repeating what I think Alan said some months ago: Threads are processes that share more ... and for absolute majority of programmers additional shared objects mean additional fsckup sources. I don't trust them to write correct async code. OK, so I don't trust the majority of programmers to find their dicks if you take their Visual Masturbation Aid++ away, but that's another story - I'm talking about otherwise clued people, not burger-flippers armed with Foo For Complete Dummies in 24 Hours. And if we just keep bearing that out to everybody a lot of the myths will go away. I would suggest that the pthreads manpages get this attitude. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
Threads are processes that share more BTW is not possible to implement threads as subset of process ? Like thread list pointed to from task_struct. It'd contain thread_structs plus another scheduler's data. The thread could be much smaller than process. Probably there is another problem I don't see, I'm just currious whether can it work like this .. devik - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
At 08:48 PM 6/20/01 +0200, Martin Devera wrote: BTW is not possible to implement threads as subset of process ? Like thread list pointed to from task_struct. It'd contain thread_structs plus another scheduler's data. The thread could be much smaller than process. Probably there is another problem I don't see, I'm just currious whether can it work like this .. Threads would then run, as a group, at the priority of the process, and then by priority within the process thread group. To be truely useful, threads need to be able to have their run priority divorced from the priority of the spawning process. By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for thread is lightweight process. Satch - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Threads are processes that share more
I thought one only refers to LWPs when talking about kernel level threads not user-space ones? Ognen On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Stephen Satchell wrote: By the way, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a synonym for thread is lightweight process. Satch -- Ognen Duzlevski Plant Biotechnology Institute National Research Council of Canada Bioinformatics team - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
