[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch 06/11] syslets: core, documentation
    On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:

    > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 11:45:23AM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
    > > Sort of, except that the whole thing can complete syncronously w/out
    > > context switches. The real point of the whole fibrils/syslets solution is
    > > that kind of optimization. The solution is as good as it is now, for
    > Except that You Can't Do That (tm). Try to predict beforehand if the code
    > path being followed will touch the FPU or SSE state, and you can't. There is
    > no way to avoid the context switch overhead, as you have to preserve things
    > so that whatever state is being returned to the user is as it was. Unless
    > you plan on resetting the state beforehand, but then you have to call into
    > arch specific code that ends up with a comparable overhead to the context
    > switch.

    I think you may have mis-interpreted my words. *When* a schedule would
    block a synco execution try, then you do have a context switch. Noone
    argue that, and the code is clear. The sys_async_exec thread will block,
    and a newly woke up thread will re-emerge to sys_async_exec with a NULL
    returned to userspace. But in a "cachehit" case (no schedule happens
    during the syscall/*let execution), there is no context switch at all.
    That is the whole point of the optimization.

    - Davide

    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: 2007-02-14 21:17    [W:0.021 / U:12.868 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site