Thank you for this! I am wondering whether to include S for socket in the syntax for scheduling. So if you have M:N:S multiplexing you can share a socket over

Thank you for this! I am wondering whether to include S for socket in the syntax for scheduling. So if you have M:N:S multiplexing you can share a socket over multiple lightweight threads which are themselves assigned to one kernel thread at a time. My implementation is a toy compared to Loom. Loom is a serious API adaptation which causes the Thread API to work as lightweight threads, I am not sure if it handles process starvation as my M:N scheduler does. if you put while (true) {} in a lightweight thread, I think that thread shall either be preempted by Loom if Loom implements that or it shall keep the lightweight thread assigned to that kernel thread, causing starvation of other lightweight threads. So you might have thread1:light1:socket1recv thread2:light2:socket1send thread1:light1:socket2recv thread1:light2:socket2send