Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!news-peer.nctu.edu.tw!news.nctu.edu.tw!spring.edu.tw!howland.erols.net!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!in3.uu.net!192.244.176.52!news.iij.ad.jp!news.CET.CO.JP!usenet From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> Newsgroups: comp.programming.threads,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: [??] pure kernel vs. dual concurrency implementations Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 11:06:20 -0800 Organization: CET Lines: 23 Message-ID: <3313382C.29DA@cet.co.jp> References: <330CE6A4.63B0@cet.co.jp> <874tf7lbxc.fsf@serpentine.com> <3313372D.1849@cet.co.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: chaos.cet.co.jp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (WinNT; I) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.programming.threads:3299 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:36061 Michael Hancock wrote: > > - The overhead of deciding when to make an upcall and performing the > > upcall itself should not be significantly greater than that of > > switching kernel-supprted threads > > When would scheduler activations occur? > > 1) When the current thread in a multi-threaded process blocks before > it's quantum is used up? > > 2) When the VP's are underutilized? > > Also, who gets priority, runnable single-threaded processes or a > runnable thread in a multi-threaded process? One more thing, does the userlib also schedule runnable single-threaded process? Regards, Mike Hancock