[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45C65353.5000602@tmr.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 16:42:43 -0500
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
CC: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANN] Userspace M-on-N threading model implementation. Alpha
release.
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 03:12:32PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
>> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>
>>>> Because user threading can avoid context switches, there will always be
>>>> cases where it will outperform o/s threads for hardware reasons.
>>>>
>>> actually.. switching from one "real" thread to another in Linux is not
>>> an actual context switch in the hardware sense... at least this part of
>>> your argument seems to be incorrect ;)
>>>
>>>
>> How does that work? Switching between kernel threads requires going into
>> the kernel, user level thread switches are all done in user mode.
>>
>> Do you have some way to change o/s threads w/o going into the kernel?
>>
>
> But going into kernel is not very expensive on Linux.
>
> On the other side, the overhead you need to add for every single syscall
> that might block for the M:N threads and the associated complications
> which make it far harder to conform to POSIX IMHO far outweight the costs
> of going into the kernel for a context switch.
That really wasn't my question, Arjan said that switching real threads
wasn't a context switch in the hardware sense, and I was asking if I
missed something. It may be cheap, but it would seem to be a context
switch none-the-less.
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@....com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
-
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