| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <45C362D2.2040407@tmr.com> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:12:02 -0500 From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com> To: Kaz Kylheku <kaz@...gmasystems.com> CC: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>, Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, libc-hacker@...rces.redhat.com, libc-alpha@...rces.redhat.com Subject: Re: [ANN] Userspace M-on-N threading model implementation. Alpha release. Kaz Kylheku wrote: > Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: >> I described in details why and how M:N model better, and its drawbacks >> include all issues mentioned by Ulrich Drepper, but nevertheless its >> advantages are far too superiour than those which can be >> provided by 1:1 >> model. > > M:N threading is an unnecessary performance hack that's needed by people > who are living in a C or C++ exile away from some language that has > lexical closures, generators or first-class continuations. Yes, that's called the "real world." Arguments of the "I don't need it, in a perfect world you wouldn't either, therefore it's a bad idea" type simply contribute nothing. Because user threading can avoid context switches, there will always be cases where it will outperform o/s threads for hardware reasons. -- Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com> "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists