Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] linux-2.5.43_vsyscall_A0 | | Date | Sat, 19 Oct 2002 21:03:09 -0500 | | From | Jeff Dike <> |
| |
andrea@suse.de said: > What I suggested is an arch specific syscall to shutdown vsyscalls > enterely for the current task and its childs,
Then I misunderstood.
> the vsyscall will call > into the real syscall with sysenter, and you will be able to > revirtualize gettimeofday/time like you do on x86 with ptrace.
And the task-specific fixmap entry would point to a page that makes the normal system call?
> what do you mean that uml needs the vsyscalls more than the other > archs?
Because its system calls are much slower than the host's. It would benefit more from vsyscalls.
> I much prefer you to keep trapping the gettimeofday and time with > ptrace after shutting down the vsyscalls for the current task, it's so > much cleaner.
And so much slower.
> The overhead of ptrace cannot be your point, if that > overhead is a showstopper uml isn't an option in the first place.
I don't plan on using ptrace forever. That overhead is going to shrink, and vsyscalls are one way to make it shrink.
I intend to make UML perform by grabbing whatever improvements from wherever I can get them, and if I can't get vsyscalls because they're not virtualizable, then, from my point of view, their design is broken.
Jeff
- 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/
|  |