Re: Re: [Bug 350] New: i386 context switch very slow compared to 2.4 due to wrmsr (performance)

• Next message: Samuel Flory: "Re: Promise SATA chips"
• Previous message: Grover, Andrew: "RE: was Re: [2.4.20][2.5.60] /proc/interrupts - Now: ACPI moving of IRQs"
• In reply to: Jamie Lokier: "Re: Re: [Bug 350] New: i386 context switch very slow compared to 2.4 due to wrmsr (performance)"
• Next in thread: Peter Tattam: "Re: [discuss] Re: [Bug 350] New: i386 context switch very slow compared to 2.4 due to wrmsr (performance)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

mika.penttila@kolumbus.fi wrote:
> BTW, why is sysenter supposed to be disabled while in vm86?

The only reason is to make vm86-mode more "compatible". In other words,
trap the GP that happens if SYSENTER_CS is 0, and make sure vm86 mode
works the way it historically did.

We can choose to say "screw it", I guess, and just see if it actually
breaks anything.

                Linus

-
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: Samuel Flory: "Re: Promise SATA chips"
• Previous message: Grover, Andrew: "RE: was Re: [2.4.20][2.5.60] /proc/interrupts - Now: ACPI moving of IRQs"
• In reply to: Jamie Lokier: "Re: Re: [Bug 350] New: i386 context switch very slow compared to 2.4 due to wrmsr (performance)"
• Next in thread: Peter Tattam: "Re: [discuss] Re: [Bug 350] New: i386 context switch very slow compared to 2.4 due to wrmsr (performance)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 22:00:43 EST