Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Technical Linux questions



Derek D. Martin writes:
| I think in general, the more threads look like processes, the less
| complex the kernel gets, but the less efficient thread switching
| becomes.  Like everything else, it's a tradeoff.

Which reminds me of  a  question  I've  never  really  seen
answered:   How  exactly  do kernel threads differ from the
result of a vfork() call?

If a kernel thread gets its own pid, and shares memory with
the  parent, that's exactly what vfork() did in the systems
that had it.  Is "kernel thread" just a fancy new name  for
an old idea?

(One difference seems to be that documentation  on  threads
is  a  lot more confused and ambiguous, making it difficult
to determine exactly how they behave.  ;-)






BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!



Boston Linux & Unix / webmaster@blu.org