On 07-Apr-98 Eduardo E. Horvath wrote:

> I don't think that was the issue at all.  If you poke around through some
> of the murky bits of the CSRG 4.4BSD book you will notice they claim to be
> ready for threads (lightweight processes) and would have implemented them
> if libc supported them.  They broke up the proc and u structures
> precisely to support kernel threads.  They just didn't have time to
> complete the process.  (No, I can't site page numbers 'cause I don't
> have my book with me.)

They didn't do anything with the proc and u structures.  Those arrived as is
before 4.4BSD.  In fact, the u structure is described as a useless anachronism
that could easily be disposed of by allocating its two remaining sub-structures
separately, since they're referenced through the proc structure anyway.  But
that hasn't been done (thinking it had been was a source of confusion for me
earlier).

I fail to see what any of this has to do with threads, anyway.  Threads imply a
shared address space by default.


--Jim Howard  <jiho@mail.c-zone.net>


----------------------------------
E-Mail: jiho@mail.c-zone.net
Date: 08-Apr-98
Time: 09:28:00

This message was sent by XFMail
----------------------------------