lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance
    On 19 Dec, Dave Jones wrote:
    > On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 02:22:36PM +0100, bart@etpmod.phys.tue.nl wrote:
    > > > However, there's another issue, namely process startup cost. I personally
    > > > want it to be as light as at all possible. I hate doing an "strace" on
    > > > user processes and seeing tons and tons of crapola showing up. Just for
    > > So why not map the magic page at 0xffffe000 at some other address as
    > > well?
    > > Static binaries can just directly jump/call into the magic page.
    >
    > .. and explode nicely when you try to run them on an older kernel
    > without the new syscall magick. This is what Linus' first
    > proof-of-concept code did.


    True, but unless I really don't get it, compatibility of a new static
    binary with an old kernel is going to break anyway.
    My point was that the double-mapped page trick adds no overhead in the
    case of a static binary, and just one extra mmap in case of a shared
    binary.

    Bart

    >
    > Dave
    >

    --
    Bart Hartgers - TUE Eindhoven
    http://plasimo.phys.tue.nl/bart/contact.html
    -
    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    [W:0.022 / U:63.588 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site