Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:22:58 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Preemptive kernel on older X86 hardware Message-ID: <200005251822.MAA85688@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 24 May 2000 19:29:49 PDT." <392C901D.31DFF4F5@elischer.org> References: <392C901D.31DFF4F5@elischer.org> <200005250205.UAA16126@berserker.bsdi.com> <200005250208.TAA78220@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <392C901D.31DFF4F5@elischer.org> Julian Elischer writes: : One paper I read recently (can't remember which) : used the method of making all locks calls to very generic (slow) : code to start with, and as each lock is run, it replaces the : calling code with a call to the appropriate 'quick' call, : depending on teh cpu type and whether there si more than one : of them. Sounds like SunOS 4.x shared library code. It did exactly this for all functions in the shared library. Some weird early cache designs made this horribly expensive (I'm thinkiong of Solbourn's KAP processor here, which had some bad silicon bugs they never fixed). Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200005251822.MAA85688>