[lkml]   [2002]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    SubjectRe: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance
    Hi Linus, Andrew,

    On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:07:53 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds <> wrote:
    > Btw, on another tangent - Andrew Morton reports that APM is unhappy about
    > the fact that the fast system call stuff required us to move the segments
    > around a bit. That's probably because the APM code has the old APM segment
    > numbers hardcoded somewhere, but I don't see where (I certainly knew about
    > the segment number issue, and tried to update the cases I saw).

    I looked at this yesterday and decided that it was OK as well.

    > Debugging help would be appreciated, especially from somebody who knows
    > the APM code.

    It would help to know what "unhappy" means :-)

    Does the following fix it for you? Untested, assumes cache lines are 32

    Stephen Rothwell

    diff -ruN 2.5.52-200212181207/include/asm-i386/segment.h 2.5.52-200212181207-apm/include/asm-i386/segment.h
    --- 2.5.52-200212181207/include/asm-i386/segment.h 2002-12-18 15:25:48.000000000 +1100
    +++ 2.5.52-200212181207-apm/include/asm-i386/segment.h 2002-12-18 15:38:34.000000000 +1100
    @@ -65,9 +65,9 @@

    - * The GDT has 23 entries but we pad it to cacheline boundary:
    + * The GDT has 25 entries but we pad it to cacheline boundary:
    -#define GDT_ENTRIES 24
    +#define GDT_ENTRIES 28

    #define GDT_SIZE (GDT_ENTRIES * 8)

    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: 2005-03-22 13:31    [W:0.027 / U:14.256 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site