Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:15:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:15:26 -0500 Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.156]:62729 "HELO perninha.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 13:15:09 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 14:55:53 -0200 (BRST) From: Marcelo Tosatti To: Alan Cox Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Using %cr2 to reference "current" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > "get_current" interrupt safe (ie switching tasks is totally atomic, as > > it's the one single "movl ..,%esp" instruction that does the real switch > > as far as the kernel is concerned). > > > > It does require using an order-2 allocation, which the current VM will > > allow anyway, but which is obviously nastier than an order-1. > > I've seen boxes dead in the water from 8K NFS (ie 16K order-2 allocations), > let alone the huge memory hit. Michael's rtlinux approach looks even more > interesting and I may have to play with that (using the TSS to ident the > cpu) Btw, I also want to see what intense "for-optimization" high-order allocators are going to do to the current VM. Think about the possible intensive pressure (and CPU wasted) caused by, for example, SCSI code which _always_ tries to do 1-order allocations (or bigger?) to allocate scatter/gather tables. We want those allocations to fail to 0-order allocations instead looping madly inside the VM freeing routines. - 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/