[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <487677F0.4000404@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:58:24 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>
>> What other trouble? It works fine.
>>
>
> Somehow you performed a mind wipe to get rid of all memory of the earlier messages?
>
Percpu on i386 hasn't been a point of discussion. It works fine, and
has been working fine for a long time. The same mechanism would work
fine on x86-64. Its only "issue" is that it doesn't support the broken
gcc abi for stack-protector.
The problem is all zero-based percpu on x86-64.
J
--
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