Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance

• Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Previous message: Grover, Andrew: "RE: [PATCH] S4bios for 2.5.52."
• In reply to: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Next in thread: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Reply: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 11:11:19AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > against 0xfffffxxx and "rollback" (or complete) any incomplete
> > gettimeofday call prior to saving a task's state. but i bet that test is
> > undesirable on all interrupt paths.
> >
>
> Exactly. This is a real problem.

No, just take the number of context switches before and after the attempt
to read the time of day.

                -ben

-- 
"Do you seek knowledge in time travel?"
-
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/

• Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Previous message: Grover, Andrew: "RE: [PATCH] S4bios for 2.5.52."
• In reply to: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Next in thread: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Reply: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 23 2002 - 22:00:18 EST