Re: Thread_Id

[RVK <rvk@prodmail.net>]

Ian Campbell wrote:

> On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 16:32 +0530, RVK wrote:
>  
>
> > Ian Campbell wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > What Arjan is saying is that pthread_t is a cookie -- this means that
> > > you cannot interpret it in any way, it is just a "thing" which you can
> > > pass back to the API, that pthread_t happens to be typedef'd to unsigned
> > > long int is irrelevant.
> > >      
> > Do you want to say for both 2.6.x and 2.4.x I should interpret that way ?
> >    
>
> As I understand it, yes, you should never try and assign any meaning to
> the values. The fact that you may have been able to find some apparent
> meaning under 2.4 is just a coincidence.
>
>  
Iam sorry I don't agree on this. This confusion have created only becoz 
of the different behavior of pthread_self() on 2.4.18 and 2.6.x kernels. 
And Iam looking for clarifying my doubt. I can't digest this at all.

rvk

> Ian.
>
> --
> Ian Campbell
> Current Noise: Nile - Annihilation Of The Wicked
>
> BOFH excuse #127:
>
> Sticky bits on disk.
> .
>
>  

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/