All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Jun Sun" <jsun@mvista.com>
Cc: <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [jsun@mvista.com: Re: [RFC] FPU context switch]
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 10:45:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <004101c25eef$ba035350$10eca8c0@grendel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20020917171434.Q17321@mvista.com

From: "Jun Sun" <jsun@mvista.com>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 02:10:17AM +0200, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:
> > Are you able to test this stuff on a proper SMP
> > system, by the way?  The efficiency of the code 
> > that manipulates interprocessor control variables 
> > can reasonably be expected to drop off a bit
> > in a system with MP cache invalidations blasting
> > left and right. 
> 
> Yes.  I understand this effect.  Solution 1), 2) 
> and 3) don't really suffer from this problem because
> variables tested & manipulated are local - unless the 
> process migrates which is a different problem.

It's not a "different problem", it's the heart of the
problem.  If we weren't worried about SMP
behavior, we wouldn't be revisiting this stuff.
While (1) can obviously be done without any
global knowledge, as could something (2)-like 
based on CPU-local state such as Status.CU1, 
(2), (3) and (4), as you describe them, all depend 
to some degree on shared multiprocessor variables 
to determine whether to save or restore FP state.

            Regards,

            Kevin K. 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com>
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [jsun@mvista.com: Re: [RFC] FPU context switch]
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 10:45:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <004101c25eef$ba035350$10eca8c0@grendel> (raw)
Message-ID: <20020918084508.U6Z1YAmRdG6FHhGZnxNUsDah-_x3u6jFQ1Y72JKOwF8@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20020917171434.Q17321@mvista.com

From: "Jun Sun" <jsun@mvista.com>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 02:10:17AM +0200, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:
> > Are you able to test this stuff on a proper SMP
> > system, by the way?  The efficiency of the code 
> > that manipulates interprocessor control variables 
> > can reasonably be expected to drop off a bit
> > in a system with MP cache invalidations blasting
> > left and right. 
> 
> Yes.  I understand this effect.  Solution 1), 2) 
> and 3) don't really suffer from this problem because
> variables tested & manipulated are local - unless the 
> process migrates which is a different problem.

It's not a "different problem", it's the heart of the
problem.  If we weren't worried about SMP
behavior, we wouldn't be revisiting this stuff.
While (1) can obviously be done without any
global knowledge, as could something (2)-like 
based on CPU-local state such as Status.CU1, 
(2), (3) and (4), as you describe them, all depend 
to some degree on shared multiprocessor variables 
to determine whether to save or restore FP state.

            Regards,

            Kevin K. 

  reply	other threads:[~2002-09-18  8:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-17 23:04 [jsun@mvista.com: Re: [RFC] FPU context switch] Jun Sun
2002-09-18  0:10 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-09-18  0:10   ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-09-18  0:14   ` Jun Sun
2002-09-18  8:45     ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
2002-09-18  8:45       ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-09-18 16:57       ` Jun Sun

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='004101c25eef$ba035350$10eca8c0@grendel' \
    --to=kevink@mips.com \
    --cc=jsun@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.