X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	"Florian Schulze" <florian DOT proff DOT schulze AT gmx DOT net>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: multi-threading
Date:	Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:56:20 +0100
Organization:	T-Online
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<a35vdp$4rk$00$1@news.t-online.com>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1020129121506 DOT 6458I-100000 AT is>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	news.t-online.com 1012302074 00 4980 tHCjT01SSmHkjT 020129 11:01:14
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT t-online DOT com
X-Sender:	510037581706-0001 AT t-dialin DOT net
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Newsreader:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> Nevertheless, you could still have preemptive threading if you are
> willing to accept the limitation that thread switch would be delayed
> until system calls (DPMI and DOS calls) return.  This limitation is
> certainly no worse than cooperative threading.
>
> If this limitation is okay, you can build your scheduler as a handler for
> some signal, like SIGALRM, and use timers to preempt threads.

This is how it's done in LWP.

Is a signal really processed after all system calls? That would be good to know,
as I'm using LWP for some project and I could make my work a little bit easier
if I know. I guess the only places where I have to be carfull, are functions
which save an internal state.

Florian

- Raw text -