Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Jun 2008 21:52 UTC, submitted by Taylor
Thread beginning with comment 320417
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-07-27
Most of OSX's FreeBSD bits are userland, not kernel. "
well yes but code from freebsd still is an important part of the kernel. if i remember correctly, originally a big part of the freebsd kernel was bolted on top of mach and combined with the driver subsystem io-kit. that's why the bad multithreading support of bsd affected xnu too. most programms don't call mach directly but through bsd-threads.
but i have no idea how much room for improvement is left and if the improvements of freebsd 7 are of any use for xnu. if they happened in a part of the kernel covered by mach, they aren't. but i think that the bsd-part also provided the posix threading model and that has been improved in freebsd 7. apple syncronised the bsd-part of xnu with freebsd 5 in darwin 7 (osx 10.3).
ps:
http://www.osnews.com/thread?283223
pss: http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/arch_xnu.html
Edited 2008-06-27 16:34 UTC