Eric W. Biederman wrote: > With the x86-64 optimized vsyscall the syscall number does > not need to be placed into a register, because you have used > the proper entry point. For any syscall worth tuning in > user space I suspect that level of optimization would be > beneficial. A fast call path that does not waste a register. The cost of loading a constant into a register is _much_ lower than the cost of indirect jumps which we have been discussing. -- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patchEric W. Biederman
- [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patchjohn stultz
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patchUlrich Drepper
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patchJamie Lokier
- Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patchEric W. Biederman
- Prev by Date: Re: Linux/IA-64 byte order
- Next by Date: major network performance difference between 2.4 and 2.6.2-rc2
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patch
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.2-rc2_vsyscall-gtod_B1.patch
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]