From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "William K. Josephson" <wkj@eecs.harvard.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] drawterm and linux 2.4.4 SMP
Message-ID: <20010721005932.A42689@honk.eecs.harvard.edu>
References: <20010721023834.60B961998A@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20010721023834.60B961998A@mail.cse.psu.edu>; from jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com on Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 10:38:30PM -0400
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 00:59:32 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d2a0b406-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 10:38:30PM -0400, jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> On Fri Jul 20 21:16:24 EDT 2001, crdevilb@mtu.edu wrote:
> > Was there some suggestion or patch anybody had to fix this, or am I
> > going to be digging into the linux kernel to find yet another hack to
> > solve this?

> I haven't looked at that code but from the description it looks like
> the thread switch hack Phil Winterbottom and I did when we ported Inferno
> to Linux a very long time ago. At that time Linux used the task

I haven't looked at the drawterm code in quite a while, but I'd
suggest using the pthreads version.  I'm fairly sure that that is what
is done under FreeBSD instead of using their rfork(2) (or the new libc
wrapper in 4.3-stable).  The pthreads implementation for Linux is a
good example of how not to use #ifdef (or it was last I looked), but
in general the implementations I've seen appear to be compatible and
stable enough to use on almost all the major Unix derivatives that
mucking around with the tss stuff probably isn't worth it for
something like drawterm.  Especially when the kernel changes as often
as it does under Linux.

 -WJ