Hmm, I used linuxthread 0.7 and did not use the pthread coming with libc5.
Indeed, the libc5 mit-pthread is not installed at all on my system.
Following the linux-pthread 0.7 documentation, it uses clone() and is for
libc5 (in libc6 it is already part of libc itself). Please not that linuxpthread
has its own implementations of gethostbyaddr_r, ... (but they seem to be
identical to those of libc 5.4.44). As they simply call gethostbyaddr or
gethostbyname, respectively, protected by a mutex they probably do not leed
to real overlapping network activity. But, correct me if I am wrong, the
read() function as kernel system call will cause true overlapping network
activity of the threads.
Calling ps I can see the threads as processes as it should be for a cloned()
based pthread implementation.
> Alan
I never observed network problems on my machine (P120, ne2000, lib5, 2.0.30
- 2.0.33). Though, we had some of these freezes reported as well as some of
the descibed oopses on machines running www-servers. But we never had any
problems on machines which do nothing than routing: they all run since 2.0.30
without interruption other than replacing the kernel with a newer version.
Another funny thing is that our web-proxy and primary nameserver does not
have these problems though under heavy load.
So my experiences are: the machines are very stable if one of the 2 conditions
are true:
- only one network card (ne2000 clone), no forwarding
- only forwarding, but no tcp-connections of there own
Though, with crash (neither with the canged nor the original one) I can't get
any oopses or crashes on any of our machines.
Wolfgang Walter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu