Re: [patch 06/11] syslets: core, documentation

[Davide Libenzi]

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:17:59PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > > That's an incorrect assumption.  Every task/thread in the system has FPU 
> > > state associated with it, in part due to the fact that glibc has to change 
> > > some of the rounding mode bits, making them different than the default from 
> > > a freshly initialized state.
> > 
> > IMO I still belive this is not a huge problem. FPU state propagation/copy 
> > can be done in a clever way, once we detect the in-async condition.
> 
> Show me.  clts() and stts() are expensive hardware operations which there 
> is no means of avoiding as control register writes impact the CPU in a not 
> trivial manner.  I've spent far too much time staring at profiles of what 
> goes on in the context switch code in the process of looking for optimizations 
> on this very issue to be ignored on this point.

The trivial case is the cachehit case. Everything flows like usual since 
we don't swap threads.
If we're going to sleep, __async_schedule has to save/copy (depending if 
TS_USEDFPU is set) the current FPU state to the newly selected service 
thread (return-to-userspace thread).
When a fault eventually happen in the new userspace thread, context is 
restored.



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/