Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 18:57:27 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, Dan Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Request for review: getcontext, setcontext, etc Message-ID: <15418.20999.801150.255824@caddis.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <20020107195545.I18706@elvis.mu.org> References: <20020106232937.9F87D38CC@overcee.netplex.com.au> <3C390746.5FE7648C@vigrid.com> <15417.59947.662052.836634@caddis.yogotech.com> <20020107130208.E18706@elvis.mu.org> <15418.663.130281.835301@caddis.yogotech.com> <20020107185929.H18706@elvis.mu.org> <15418.17708.386130.893862@caddis.yogotech.com> <20020107195545.I18706@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > > threads. > > > > > > > > > > Is this possible? > > > > > > > > In the future it may be possible, if we keep track of FP-usage on a > > > > thread basis instead of a process basis. This requires kernel threads. > > > > > > No, as I stated above, I don't think this requires kernel threads. > > > > I understand now, thanks. However, I'm not sure how easily this can be > > done. > > All you need is a hook to reset the FP-used bit, any application > that clears the bit incorrectly gets what it deserves. :) That's the easy part. The hard part is setting the 'need-FPU' bit in the process, and making sure to catch the FPU exception, resetting the bit in the thread, then making sure the FPU is retried safely. Nate 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?15418.20999.801150.255824>