From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael A Fetterman <Michael.Fetterman@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Assignment of GDT entries
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 11:58:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <450854F3.20603@goop.org> (raw)
What's the rationale for the current assignment of GDT entries? In
particular, this section:
* 0 - null
* 1 - reserved
* 2 - reserved
* 3 - reserved
*
* 4 - unused <==== new cacheline
* 5 - unused
*
* ------- start of TLS (Thread-Local Storage) segments:
*
* 6 - TLS segment #1 [ glibc's TLS segment ]
* 7 - TLS segment #2 [ Wine's %fs Win32 segment ]
* 8 - TLS segment #3
* 9 - reserved
* 10 - reserved
* 11 - reserved
What are entries 1-3 and 9-11 reserved for? Must they be unused for
some reason, or is there some proposed use that has not been impemented yet?
Also, is there a particular reason kernel GDT entries start at 12?
Would there be a problem in using either 4 or 5 for a kernel GDT descriptor?
I'm asking because I'd like to use one of these entries for the PDA
descriptor, so that it is on the same cache line as the TLS
descriptors. That way, the entry/exit segment register reloads would
still only need to touch two GDT cache lines. Would there be a real
problem in doing this?
Thanks,
J
next reply other threads:[~2006-09-13 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-13 18:58 Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2006-09-13 19:16 ` Assignment of GDT entries Arjan van de Ven
2006-09-13 20:00 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-13 20:02 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-13 20:20 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-13 20:59 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-09-13 21:15 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-13 21:35 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-14 0:25 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-09-14 1:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2006-09-14 13:03 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-13 19:55 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-09-13 20:08 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-13 20:32 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-09-13 21:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-13 21:47 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-13 22:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-13 22:22 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-14 6:00 ` Andi Kleen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-09-14 3:23 Albert Cahalan
2006-09-14 6:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-14 4:06 Albert Cahalan
2006-09-14 4:44 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-09-14 6:19 ` Albert Cahalan
2006-09-14 6:28 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-09-14 7:12 ` Albert Cahalan
2006-09-14 7:24 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-09-14 6:29 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-15 7:55 Mikael Pettersson
2006-09-15 8:20 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2006-09-15 8:58 ` Mikael Pettersson
2006-09-15 18:27 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=450854F3.20603@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=Michael.Fetterman@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=zach@vmware.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox