From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:33:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nixon.xkey.com ([209.245.148.124]:22740 "HELO nixon.xkey.com") by linux-mips.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:33:54 +0200 Received: (qmail 6665 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2002 18:33:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO localhost.conservativecomputer.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Sep 2002 18:33:45 -0000 Received: (from lindahl@localhost) by localhost.conservativecomputer.com (8.11.6/8.11.0) id g8HIVbx02025 for linux-mips@linux-mips.org; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:31:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: lindahl set sender to lindahl@keyresearch.com using -f Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:31:36 -0700 From: Greg Lindahl To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [RFC] FPU context switch Message-ID: <20020917113136.A1890@wumpus.internal.keyresearch.com> References: <20020917110423.E17321@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20020917110423.E17321@mvista.com>; from jsun@mvista.com on Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 11:04:23AM -0700 Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 207 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: lindahl@keyresearch.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 11:04:23AM -0700, Jun Sun wrote: > Currently I am leaning towards 2) or 3). What is your opinion? (1) and (2) are how other archs like Alpha and Itanium deal with this. I think (3) is likely to be painful to debug and maintain and won't win much. So I'd suggest (2). g