On Friday 16 June 2006 17:31, Zoltan Menyhart wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > That is not how user space TLS works. It usually has a base a register.
>
> Can you please give me a real life (simplified) example?
On x86-64 it's just %fs:offset. gcc is a bit dumb on this and usually
loads the base address from %fs:0 first.
>
> > This means it cannot be cache colored (because you would need a static
> > offset) and you couldn't share task_structs on a page.
>
> I do not see the problem.
Your scheme relies on task_struct fields being on a known offset
in the page. But slab cache coloring varies the offset to make the data
spread out better in the caches.
> Can you explain please?
> E.g. the scheduler pulls a task instead of the current one. The CPU
> will see "current->thread_info.cpu"-s of all the tasks at the same
> offset anyway.
It varies relative to the start of page.
That was one of the bigger wins relative to the task_struct in stack
page of 2.4 had.
>
> > Also you would make task_struct part of the userland ABI which
> > seems like a very very bad idea to me. It means we couldn't change
> > it anymore.
>
> We can make some wrapper, e.g.:
>
> user_per_cpu_var(name, offset)
You would need to wrap everything and likely users would like
task_struct so much that they accessed it anyways without your wrappers.
> "vgetcpu()" would also be added to the ABI which we couldn't change
> easily either.
Yes, but it's a defined function. No different from a system call.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
