[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48A5B943.1010607@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:13:39 -0700
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hugh@...itas.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, briangrant@...gle.com,
cgd@...gle.com, mbligh@...gle.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: pthread_create() slow for many threads; also time to revisit
64b context switch optimization?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Suggest:
>
> +#define MAP_STACK 0x20000 /* 31bit or 64bit address for stack, */
> + /* whichever is faster on this CPU */
I agree. Except for the comment.
> Also, is this _only_ useful for thread stacks, or are there other
> memory allocations where 31-bitness affects execution speed on old P4s?
Actually, I would define the flag as "do whatever is best assuming the
allocation is used for stacks".
For instance, minimally the /proc/*/maps output could show "[user
stack]" or something like this. For security, perhaps, setting of
PROC_EXEC can be prevented.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkiluUMACgkQ2ijCOnn/RHSb5gCfb5VhiLA/wbamoAVqfxR32k4N
tSIAoK/KAmwcVd+RjkPnb9RSuAeL/KLV
=2ynl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
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