On 25 Mar 2000, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> sasha@mysql.com writes:
>
> > My guess is that clone() should return very fast to the original thread, but
> > might take a while to return to the newly created thread, which is what is
> > causing the problem.
>
> The kernel does not allow using clone() directly because some
> additional functionality required to implement the correct POSIX
> threads behaviour is missing. Do you think we make these things slow
> on purpose?
there is a saying I like:
" Never attribute to malice that which can be adquatly explained by
incompatence. "
> If you want to see this changes get the kernel changes in place.
> There are various patches floating around which combined will allow a
> correct and fast implementation. But they were not added.
Any special reason they were not added?
Do you have a list of these patches?
I am sure that if the next version of the thread library required a set of
kernel patches to run effectivly then those patches would end up in the
kernel source tree within a version or so.
Alvin Starr || voice: (416)585-9971
Interlink Connectivity || fax: (416)585-9974
alvin@iplink.net ||
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 31 2000 - 21:00:18 EST