From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Nov 26 23:49:27 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0AC037B479; Sun, 26 Nov 2000 23:49:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id IAA14456; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:49:23 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA54244; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:49:23 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 08:49:23 +0100 (CET) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Daniel Eischen , John Baldwin , Jonathan Lemon , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Thread-specific data and KSEs In-Reply-To: <20001121192331.E18037@fw.wintelcom.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > It's just one more register that has to be saved. I don't > > think it's going to matter much. > No extra TLB faults/invalidations? Aren't segment registers > somewhat expensive to load? Upon loading a task state (with ltr or a gate), you will restore all segment registers from the tss, regardless of their content, and a load of the shadow portion of the segment will be attempted anyway. I don't think this is the right place to shave off cycles, nor do I think the speed is even the most relevant issue for this extension, but rather the abuse of segments that are ment to hold real data. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message