[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Using %cr2 to reference "current"
    > Is using %cr2 really faster than the old implementation, or is there
    > another reason? It seems that the alignment constraints on the stack
    > still remains, since the %esp solution still remains in places...

    The stack is no longer aligned. We allocate two pages and disturb the stack
    by upto 1.5K. We slab the task structs.

    > It might also be worth considering a segment-register based
    > implementation instead. The reason we're not using %fs and %gs in the
    > kernel anymore is because of the setup slowness, but perhaps using
    > them (use %fs since it's much more likely to be NULL and thus faster
    > to restore) would be faster than using %cr2?

    It may be. Likewise its not clear if %cr2 should hold current or a cpu ident
    pointer (so you dont reload on switch of task). This needs more
    benchmarking. Its in current -ac to verify the theory is correct not the
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [W:0.033 / U:19.796 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site