[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DEF3A93.8871.1BF773E2@pageexec.freemail.hu>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:02:11 +0200
From: pageexec@...email.hu
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>, x86@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@...labs.com>,
Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] x86-64: Emulate legacy vsyscalls
On 8 Jun 2011 at 8:48, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > you seemed to have made a distinction, you tell me ;), [...]
>
> I have not made any distinction at all, *you* wrote:
i asked you that question because for all this time you seemed to
have been very worked up by the fact that i called the page fault
path as not 'fast'. i thought maybe what caused your nervous reaction
and desperate attempts at trying to justify it was due to some
misunderstanding in wording, but i now see that we probably talked
about the same thing. with the exception that you *still* have not
provided any evidence for your claim. why is that Ingo? do you have
nothing to prove your single cycle 'improvemnt'? (sorry, had a
chuckle again ;).
--
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