To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It was mentioned on a FreeBSD quartly report a while back in regards to KSE and slow performance on non-x86 architectures.
One has to ask how much is due to KSE tuning beant towards a particular architecture, or are the architecturers were there is bad performance, just plain well crap architecture.
So did FreeBSD abandon the M:N threading model? That would be a shame after all the work that went into it.
Everybody is moving away from M:N. It's a bad idea that looks good on paper. Solaris and AIX both support M:N, and Linux can use it with NGPT (not the same at NPTL), but it is not the default on any of these systems.
Basically, threading only works efficiently if the kernel "knows" about all of the user threads. For example, in M:N (and M:1), it is possible for one blocking thread to block one or more of its peer threads, even if they are runnable. With increases in physical memory and addressable memory (with 64-bit systems), there is no excuse for the kernel to delegate thread management to userspace.




Member since:
2005-07-21
So did FreeBSD abandon the M:N threading model? That would be a shame after all the work that went into it. Then again: if you must then you must. Where can I find more information about this? Wikipedia doesn't seem to mention this more does the KSE homepage. Did I misread your comment?