From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by sod.res.cmu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA04371 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 16:50:56 -0500 Received: (from sieler@localhost) by bart.allegro.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA30430 for hppa-linux@thepuffingroup.com; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 13:50:44 -0800 From: Stan Sieler Message-Id: <199903292150.NAA30430@bart.allegro.com> Subject: Re: [hppa-linux] syscall work To: hppa-linux@thepuffingroup.com Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 13:50:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-ID: Hi, > okie, but why emulating gate instruction, when there is already such > instruction exist? (; Simple: HP does this...there must be a reason. They appear to do it on selected models of PA-RISC systems. Why? Don't know. I can only conjecture...and the conjecture is the obvious one: there must be some circumstance where GATE fails. Otherwise, *why* replace it with a slightly slower mechanism? -- Stan Sieler sieler@allegro.com http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html