[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1263799397.4283.2.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:23:17 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
utrace-devel <utrace-devel@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Maneesh Soni <maneesh@...ibm.com>,
Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/7] User Space Breakpoint Assistance Layer (UBP)
On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 18:48 -0500, Jim Keniston wrote:
> As you may have noted before, I think FP would be a special problem
> for your approach. I'm not sure how folks would react to the idea of
> executing FP instructions in kernel space. But emulating them is also
> tough. There's an IEEE FP emulation package somewhere in one of the
> Linux arch directories, but I'm not sure how precise it is, and
> dropping even 1 bit of precision is unacceptable for many
> applications, since such errors tend to grow in complex computations
> employing many FP instructions.
Well, we have kernel space using FP/MMX/SSE like things, its not hard if
you really need it, but in this case I think its easier than normal,
because we'll just allow it to change the userspace state because that
is exactly what we want it to do.
--
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