From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Nov 21 17:51: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD7F37B4C5; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 17:51:05 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id eAM1p0E23357; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 17:51:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 17:51:00 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: John Baldwin Cc: Daniel Eischen , Jonathan Lemon , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Thread-specific data and KSEs Message-ID: <20001121175100.B18037@fw.wintelcom.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from jhb@FreeBSD.ORG on Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 05:19:23PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * John Baldwin [001121 17:19] wrote: > > On 22-Nov-00 Daniel Eischen wrote: > >> %gs ? as I mentioned in my other message, this one might be useful for > >> addressing a structure of thread-local variables much like %fs is used for > >> per-CPU data. It also has value in that supposedly x86-64 (aka k64) has > >> both > >> %fs and %gs, but no other seg regs. > > > > All I need is one. > > Well, %gs would cover x86 and k64. I think ia64 has several application > registers that are available for OS use and we could steal one of those. I'm > not sure about the alpha though. Don't more segment registers cause more overhead for context switches? Just wondering. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message