Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:05:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:05:10 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:61700 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:05:09 -0500 Message-ID: <3DFF772E.2050107@transmeta.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:12:46 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Organization: Transmeta Corporation User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021119 X-Accept-Language: en, sv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Dave Jones , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 826 Lines: 22 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > It's not as good as a pure user-mode solution using tsc could be, but > we've seen the kinds of complexities that has with multi-CPU systems, and > they are so painful that I suspect the sysenter approach is a lot more > palatable even if it doesn't allow for the absolute best theoretical > numbers. > The complexity only applies to nonsynchronized TSCs though, I would assume. I believe x86-64 uses a vsyscall using the TSC when it can provide synchronized TSCs, and if it can't it puts a normal system call inside the vsyscall in question. -hpa - 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/