[Top] [All Lists]

Re: thread-ready ABIs

To: "Kevin D. Kissell" <>
Subject: Re: thread-ready ABIs
From: Ralf Baechle <>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 16:24:15 -0800
Cc: "H . J . Lu" <>, Ulrich Drepper <>, GNU libc hacker <>,
In-reply-to: <01b801c1a081$3f6518e0$0deca8c0@Ulysses>; from on Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 01:35:38AM +0100
References: <m3elkoa5dw.fsf@myware.mynet> <> <01b801c1a081$3f6518e0$0deca8c0@Ulysses>
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 01:35:38AM +0100, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:

> Thank you for posting this to linux-mips, since I'm not sure 
> that anyone at MIPS is on the GNU_libc_hacker list.
> It would, in principle, be possible to save/restore k0
> or k1 (but not both) if no other clever solution can be found.  
> There are other VM OSes that manage to do so for MIPS, 
> for other outside-the-old-ABI reasons.  It does, of course,
> add some instructions and some memory traffic to the 
> low-level exception handling , and we would have to look 
> at whether we would want to make such a feature standard 
> or specific to a "thread-ready" kernel build.

Changing the kernel for the small number of threaded applications that
exists and taking a performance impact for the kernel itself and anything
that's using threads is an exquisite example for a bad tradeoff.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>