Re: User API still a goal?

[Chris Turner <c.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon wrote:
>     This has to do with the N:M threading concept.  It has been abandoned
>     in favor of 1:1.
>
>     I think N:M is still desireable but what is needed is some sort of
>     official micro-threading API where the programmer has full knowledge
>     that a thread is a micro-thread, operating under different rules,
>     as part of a set of micro-threads opreating within a POSIX thread.


this seems to be the consensus..

e.g: M:N is theoretically better, but also a PITA ..

http://www.netbsd.org/changes/changes-5.0.html#newlock2
http://www.freebsd.org/relnotes/CURRENT/relnotes/new.html
http://www.sun.com/software/whitepapers/solaris9/multithread.pdf

having a simple API for a default 1:1 + ability to override might be a 
nifty way to work around + build better systems though .. lots of 
dynamic languages do userland threading - having a standard API would 
make implementing these things much simpler I'd imagine..