Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:25:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:25:31 -0500 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:30908 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:25:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:26:50 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: "H. Peter Anvin" , Linus Torvalds cc: Dave Jones , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance Message-ID: <160470000.1040153210@flay> In-Reply-To: <3DFF772E.2050107@transmeta.com> References: <3DFF772E.2050107@transmeta.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1020 Lines: 22 >> 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. You can't use the TSC to do gettimeofday on boxes where they aren't syncronised anyway though. That's nothing to do with vsyscalls, you just need a different time source (eg the legacy stuff or HPET/cyclone). M. - 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/