From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 20:56:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 20:56:16 -0400 Received: from sncgw.nai.com ([161.69.248.229]:33978 "EHLO mcafee-labs.nai.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 20:56:01 -0400 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.7 on Linux X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 17:59:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Davide Libenzi To: Gerhard Mack Subject: Re: Alan Cox quote? (was: Re: accounting for threads) Cc: "linux-kernel @ vger . kernel . org" Cc: "linux-kernel @ vger . kernel . org" , Timur Tabi , Mikulas Patocka , landley@webofficenow.com, Larry McVoy , "J . A . Magallon" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 25-Jun-2001 Gerhard Mack wrote: >> BTW, after all I have read all POSIX threads library should be no more than >> a wrapper over fork(), clone and so on. Why are they so bad then ? >> I am going to get glibc source to see what is inside pthread_create... > > If I recall it had to do with problems in signal delivery... 1) pthread_create() does not create the thread, it write through a pipe to a thread manager that will create a thread 2) pthread ( in linux ) is signal intensive - Davide