Re: Finished threads remain as zombies on 2.6?
Another datapoint - I have a 2nd 164LX, runs Debian testing instead of
unstable (libc version 2.3.2.ds1-2) - I built the same kernel (126.96.36.199) that
is running on the Debian unstable system.
Threads clean up just fine, so I'm going to hazard a guess that it is not the
kernel at this time - porbably something with pthreads in the unstable dist.?
On Sunday 28 August 2005 09:12 pm, Tyson Whitehead wrote:
> Humm. I'm running 2.6.12 and libc 2.3.5-4 as well. You program does the
> exact same thing (i.e., leaves zombie).
> I wrote it up a C version to be sure (attached for anyone else wants to
> check it). The exact samething happens. Even detaching the threads does
> not help.
> Both programs work fine on x86. There is also some weirdness going on
> with /proc. The x86 box (same kernel version) make a master entry for the
> process (i.e., /proc/xxxx) and put the threads under the tasks subdirector
> (i.e., /proc/xxxx/task/yyyy). The Alpha box puts them all under process
> entries (i.e., /proc/xxxx).
> Weired. Is pthread implemented significantly different on the Alpha (i.e.,
> spawning full process instead of light weight ones), or is the kernel just
> messed up?
> Later -T
> PS: compile with "gcc -o threadtest threadtest.c -lpthread"