Re: Context switch times

bill davidsen
2001-10-09T13:49:14Z

In article <200110090455.f994tNB22322@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca asked:

| Hm. Perhaps when I did my tests (where I noticed a penalty), we didn't
| have lazy FPU saving. Now we disable the FPU, and restore state when
| we trap, right?
|
| I do note this comment in arch/i386/kernel/process.c:
| * We fsave/fwait so that an exception goes off at the right time
| * (as a call from the fsave or fwait in effect) rather than to
| * the wrong process. Lazy FP saving no longer makes any sense
| * with modern CPU's, and this simplifies a lot of things (SMP
| * and UP become the same).
|
| So what exactly is the difference between our "delayed FPU restore
| upon trap" (which I think of as lazy FPU saving), and the "lazy FP"
| saving in the comments?

We always save the FPU, but only restore it when/if it is going to be
used. And obviously we don't want to save it if it hasn't been used,
since it wasn't restored...

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"If I were a diplomat, in the best case I'd go hungry. In the worst
case, people would die."
-- Robert Lipe