From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Grundler Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] 2.6.10-rc1-pa11 profile data Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:36:05 -0700 Message-ID: <20041111183605.GA19327@colo.lackof.org> References: <20041111075431.GB9768@colo.lackof.org> <20041111081154.GR15714@tausq.org> <20041111173901.GX2639@baldric.uwo.ca> <20041111174258.GT15714@tausq.org> <20041111175021.GA26623@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20041111175933.GU15714@tausq.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org To: Randolph Chung Return-Path: In-Reply-To: <20041111175933.GU15714@tausq.org> List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: parisc-linux-bounces@lists.parisc-linux.org On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 09:59:33AM -0800, Randolph Chung wrote: > sure, we can zero all the call clobbered registers on exit. But not > having to save all of those pesky floating pointer registers and half a > dozen general registers should still be a huge win. Randolph and I talked about this more privately. In a nutshell, "huge win" is slightly overstating it and we agree fixing the cache utilization would be a much bigger win. Randolph thinks we can save 20 load and stores per interrupt and potential context switches. The thinking is we are saving/restoring some registers twice and should split the save/restore between interrupt/trap and context switch code. So if no context switch is performed, we only save/restore a subset of the registers manually and the rest are preserved according to the ABI. Did I get that right? thanks, grant _______________________________________________ parisc-linux mailing list parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux