| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20061012171929.GB24658@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:19:30 +0100 From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> To: John Richard Moser <nigelenki@...cast.net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Can context switches be faster? On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:44:56AM -0400, John Richard Moser wrote: > Can context switches be made faster? This is a simple question, mainly > because I don't really understand what happens during a context switch > that the kernel has control over (besides storing registers). They can be, but there's a big penalty that you pay for it. You must limit the virtual memory space to 32MB for _every_ process in the system, and if you have many processes running (I forget how many) you end up running into the same latency problems. The latency problem comes from the requirement to keep the cache coherent with the VM mappings, and to this extent on Linux we need to flush the cache each time we change the VM mapping. There have been projects in the past which have come and gone to support the "Fast Context Switch" approach found on these CPUs, but patches have _never_ been submitted, so I can only conclude that the projects never got off the ground. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists