RE: Scheduler activations (IIRC) question

"Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lib.phil,gmane.linux.kernel.aio.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
> From: Dan Kegel [mailto:[email protected]]
> 
> Jamie Lokier is heading down the KSE / kernel activations
> pathway because he still thinks kernel threads are wrong.
> The discussion is under the subject "Scheduler activations (IIRC) question":

Last year I was playing with a similar concept, but kind of
bailed out because it still didn't solve all the complexities
that M:N had -- however, AFAIR, his interest in more in doing
very low weight threads, right? kind of co-routines; probably it
is worth for that case

Having worked on NGPT more than I am willing to admit,
I would not touch M:N threading again even with a yardstick; 
for simple threading it works--but when you want to do complex 
synchronization with good timing, it is not worth anymore.

Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own (and my fault)
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.