lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance
Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Yeah, it's not very convenient. I didn't find any real alternatives,
> though, and you can always just put 0xfffff000 in memory or registers and
> jump to that.

Putting the value into memory myself is not possible. In a DSO I have
to address memory indirectly. But all registers (except %ebp, and maybe
it'll be used some day) are used at the time of the call.

But there is a way: if I'm using

#define makesyscall(name) \
movl $__NR_##name, $eax; \
call 0xfffff000-__NR_##name($eax)
and you'd put at address 0xfffff000 the address of the entry point the
wrappers wouldn't have any problems finding it.

> In fact, I suspect that if you actually want to use it in
> glibc, then at least in the short term that's what you need to do anyway,
> sinc eyou probably don't want to have a glibc that only works with very
> recent kernels.

That's a compilation option. We might want to do dynamic testing and
yes, a simple pointer indirection is adequate.

But still, the problem is detecting the capable kernels. You have said
not long ago that comparing kernel versions is wrong. And I agree. It
doesn't cover backports and nothing. But there is a lack of an alternative.

If you don't like the process-global page thingy (anymore) the
alternative would be a sysconf() system call.

--
--------------. ,-. 444 Castro Street
Ulrich Drepper \ ,-----------------' \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA
Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `---------------------------
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:31    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site