Re: 2.6.18-rc6-mm1: GPF loop on early boot

[Ingo Molnar]

* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >yes - but loading a null selector is a special-case: you dont have to 
> >invalidate/reload the shadow, you just have to turn access off. This 
> >might or might not make a difference on modern CPUs (it makes a 
> >difference with older CPUs) - but it's worth a try nevertheless. You 
> >measured a 9 cycles degradation with the %gs method, we could recover 
> >some of that.
> >  
> 
> It's a worthwhile experiment.  The gain would be the NULL selector 
> load, but the loss would be an additional segment reload on context 
> switch and TLS ABI incompatibility (which is more difficult to 
> quantify).

the ratio between the number of syscalls vs. the number of context 
switches is 1-2 orders of magnitude. So a loss of 9 cycles in the 
syscall path is roughly equal to a loss of 90-900 cycles in switch_to() 
costs ...

the TLS ABI is just a gcc stupidity. Why did they pick the _second_ 
extra selector, instead of the first one ...? Anyway, perhaps this could 
be solved by extending gcc with a switch to also generate __thread code 
off %fs. Probably not worth the pain though ...

	Ingo
-
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/