[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Use uname not sysctl to get the kernel revision
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "H. Peter Anvin" <> writes:
>> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 12:33:56PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
>>>> Roland McGrath wrote:
>>>>> We could also put the uname info (modulo nodename) into the vDSO.
>>>> Or even better: real topology information.
>>> AND rather than OR would be even better. So glibc could find kernel
>>> version, etc. and topology in the vDSO cheaply.
>> Wouldn't it make more sense for this to be in ELF tags, rather than the vdso?
>> Another alternative, I guess, would be to put a pointer in the ELF tags, which
>> may point into the vdso.
> Cheap and simple access to topology information would be interesting.
> Glibc just wants to know if our kernel is SMP so it can know if it is
> ok to busy wait for a bit waiting for a mutex. Or if busy waiting is
> a complete loss.
> The practical challenge is that topology information is not fixed but
> potentially varies at runtime.
> Ulrich what would be interesting besides the possibility of having
> multiple cpus?

Something that might make sense to ask CPU vendors for in the future: an
instruction that can either trap or be a noop (or better, cpu_relax)
based on a control register.

Not that that solves any problem any time soon.

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: 2006-07-12 23:33    [W:0.074 / U:26.848 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site