From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 04:12:25 -0800 Received: from [194.90.113.98] ([194.90.113.98]:22547 "EHLO yes.home.krftech.com") by oss.sgi.com with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 04:12:16 -0800 Received: from jungo.com (kobie.home.krftech.com [199.204.71.69]) by yes.home.krftech.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA00798; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 14:54:42 +0200 Message-ID: <3A5AFAC8.CA682600@jungo.com> Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:49:29 +0200 From: Michael Shmulevich X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17-21mdk i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: User applications References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips-outgoing As a side question, I would like to to know why exactly the CPU cache operations are promoted to the syscall status? What is the situation that a user in its program would like to call cacheflush() ? Unless, of course, he is doing DoS. I can understand why we need this in kernel, for context switch, for example, but as a syscall?... Michael. "Maciej W. Rozycki" wrote: > On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > > > $ mipsel-linux-objdump -T /usr/mipsel-linux/lib/libc-2.2.so | grep cachectl > > > 00000000600ca0a0 w DF *ABS* 0000000000000000 GLIBC_2.0 cachectl > > > $ ls /usr/mipsel-linux/include/sys/cachectl.h > > > /usr/mipsel-linux/include/sys/cachectl.h > > > > cachectl(2) is a syscall that is manipulates the cachability of a memory > > area. And not yet implemented ... > > s/cachectl$/cacheflush/, of course (but the header is still valid). > > -- > + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + > +--------------------------------------------------------------+ > + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +