Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:38:48 +0100 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely8.cicely.de> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, Dan Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Request for review: getcontext, setcontext, etc Message-ID: <20020106113847.A15885@cicely8.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <3C381B48.AADDCA2B@mindspring.com> References: <3C37E559.B011DF29@vigrid.com> <20020106032709.A82406@elvis.mu.org> <3C381B48.AADDCA2B@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 01:39:20AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > * Dan Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> [020105 23:36] wrote: > > > Is there a reason that getcontext and setcontext need to be > > > system calls? > > > > Atomicity? > > To flush register windows on setcontext() on SPARC. wflush isn't a priviledged instruction and usualy emulated on < sparcv9. mit-pthreads use it from userland. Are there any performance reasons to flush windows in kernel? AFAIK wflush makes an exception for each window on it's own so I could imagine a possible difference. Or am I overseeing something? -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.de 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?20020106113847.A15885>