> On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 11:23:48PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > >
> > > hmm - when did that change ? i thought that was the case and was baked
> > > up on hat asumtion by someone else a few weeks ago (primarily the
> > > reason being to make sure the threads share caches for speed reasons
> > > and to make sure cache concurrency issues are moe easiyl dealt with...
> > > well thats what i unerstood... i may be wrong (2.2 or 2.3 may have
> > > changed that)
> >
> > No, pthreads changed that, from my understanding. linuxthreads did
> > it all in one thing w/o ever actually calling the kernel 'clone'. pthreads
> > properly calles 'clone' and therefore each thread gets it's own PID and as
> > such can be scheduled on any CPU. (Well, that's not the direct reason, but
> > you know what I mean).
>
> Not quite. Linuxthreads has always used clone and is an attempt to
> implement the POSIX threading spec. There has been a number of
> pthread implementations over the years that were strictly user space.
> I think there is a GNU threads or something like that which is still a
> user-space pthread implementation.
Perhaps that's what I was thinking of. I just remember way back when
during my first exposure to Linux the only thread library I had was one that
did it all in user-space, and then I heard about glibc2 having threads that
actually used kernel calls and would scale across processors...
Stephen
-
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/