From owner-freebsd-arch  Tue Nov 21 19:23:38 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6212F37B4D7; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:23:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id eAM3NW925749;
	Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:23:32 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:23:32 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Thread-specific data and KSEs
Message-ID: <20001121192331.E18037@fw.wintelcom.net>
References: <20001121175100.B18037@fw.wintelcom.net> <Pine.SUN.3.91.1001121221431.26351B-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1001121221431.26351B-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>; from eischen@vigrid.com on Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 10:15:28PM -0500
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> [001121 19:15] wrote:
> > 
> > Don't more segment registers cause more overhead for context switches?
> 
> It's just one more register that has to be saved.  I don't
> think it's going to matter much.

No extra TLB faults/invalidations?  Aren't segment registers
somewhat expensive to load?

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message