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

[Benjamin LaHaise]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 12:14:29PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> 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.

And I will repeat myself: that cannot be done.  Tell me how the following 
what if scenario works: you're in an MMX optimized memory copy and you take 
a page fault.  How does returning to the submittor of the async operation 
get the correct MMX state restored?  It doesn't.

		-ben
-- 
"Time is of no importance, Mr. President, only life is important."
Don't Email: <dont@xxxxxxxxx>.
-
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/