On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 02:26 +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > Hey Ben,
> > I appreciate your looking over my patch. You are correct, the
> > conversion is a bit rough and I've not yet been able to work on the
> > powerpc vDSO, although I'd like to get it working so any help or
> > suggestions would be appreciated (is there a reason the vDSO is written
> > in ASM?).
> >
> > If you have any other concerns w/ that patch, or the generic timekeeping
> > code, please let me know and I'll do what I can to address them.
>
> Well, I've been wanting to look at your stuff and possibly do the
> conversion for some time, provided we don't lose performances ... Our
> current implementation is very optimized to avoid even memory barriers
> in most cases and I doubt we'll be able to be as fine tuned using your
> generic code, thus it's a tradeoff decision that we have to do. But
> then, I need to look into the details before doing any final
> statement :)
Ok, although do let me know if you see places where the generic code
could use any of the optimizations used in powerpc.
thanks
-john
-
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]
