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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site