Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 18:59:55 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Dan Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, Kelly Yancey <kbyanc@posi.net>, Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Request for review: getcontext, setcontext, etc Message-ID: <15423.39067.822201.548915@caddis.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <3C3F9A46.BBA1A1D5@vigrid.com> References: <20020112005212.5CB2038FF@overcee.netplex.com.au> <3C3F9A46.BBA1A1D5@vigrid.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> If getcontext (and therefore swapcontext) had to save the FPU state Can you explain to me why get/setcontext would *NOT* have to save the FPU state (other than why bother cause the x86 can't do it correctly)? Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15423.39067.822201.548915>