Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 11:38:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 11:38:38 -0400 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:59829 "HELO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 11:38:37 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 19:41:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Linus Torvalds , , Alexandre Julliard , Luca Barbieri Subject: Re: [patch] tls-2.5.31-D5 In-Reply-To: <20020812112155.S1596@devserv.devel.redhat.com> 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 Content-Length: 1170 Lines: 27 On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > As each supported TLS entry has its context-switch time cost, I think we > should stay at 2 supported TLS entries. 4 are almost as good - and they also solve the 0x40 problem. > My understanding was that the GDT patches were written to optimize the > common case (all threaded apps using LDT and with the advent of __thread > support causing every single application to use LDT), with 2 TLS entries > where one is for libc/libpthread and the other one is for application > usage I think it is enough for 99.9% of apps. In the rare case someone > needs more, there is still LDT which offers 8192 entries. well, i think i have to agree ... if it wasnt for Wine's 0x40 descriptor. But it certainly does not come free. We could have 3 TLS entries (0x40 will be the last entry), and the copying cost is 9 cycles. (compared to 6 cycles in the 2 entries case.) Good enough? Ingo - 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/