Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple inst

[Fredrik Persson]

Yup. You're right. 

1. Those are not processes since Linux 'ps' and 'top' reports threads just
as it reports processes. 

2. Threads reports the total amount of RAM allocated to the process it belongs
to. (Excercise: what else could it report??)

/Fredrik

> 
> From: Nick Capik <ncapik at patriot.net>
> Date: 2002/09/11 Wed PM 01:29:43 CEST
> To: Frank Joerdens <frank at joerdens.de>,  wine-users at winehq.com
> Subject: Re: Is wine *always* mapping threads onto processes? (Was: Re: multiple instance
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I believe that this memory is shared between the processes, so that the total 
> usage for the 5 processes is 32 MB.  (I am simply repeating what was said 
> previously about a similar situation, so don't ask many details ;)
> 
> Nick Capik
> 
> On Wednesday 11 September 2002 06:47 am, Frank Joerdens wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 10:43:12AM +0200, Fredrik Persson wrote:
> > > > > it's probably a unique instance of the app with 5 threads in it.
> > > > > each windows thread matches a unix-like process.
> > > >
> > > > Is that the general way wine translates windows threads, mapping them
> > > > onto processes? Would that really be a good idea? Usually the argument
> > > > goes that designing an app in a multithreaded rather than multiprocess
> > > > fashion is better, more resource friendly, albeit harder to do (e.g.
> > > > because inter-thread communication is much easier to do than
> > > > inter-process communication).
> > >
> > > Guys, are you *sure* that this is how Wine does it? You know, Linux
> > > always lists threads as separate processes in the ps listing.
> >
> > Then it probably doesn't. That Linux lists threads like processes would
> > explain it, kind of. What still bothers me a little though is that if I
> > start the application under Windows 2000, in the Task-Manager I see
> > exactly one instance consuming 32 MB of RAM, whereas top under Linux
> > shows 5, consuming 32 MB each, or so it seems. Would top give false
> > information here about RAM consumption?
> >
> > Regards, Frank
> > _______________________________________________
> > wine-users mailing list
> > wine-users at winehq.com
> > http://www.winehq.com/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE9fykqP1TgTrKOOgsRAqQTAJwKX7iT8BK8xdCrz74ipWXqVyqUCACgwjwP
> edyfGq9LVajlKXzcQmCdoh4=
> =/uio
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wine-users mailing list
> wine-users at winehq.com
> http://www.winehq.com/mailman/listinfo/wine-users
>