lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.4-pre1_vsyscall-gtod_B3-part3 (3/3)
    On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 04:14:08PM -0800, john stultz wrote:
    > All,
    > This patch implements the somewhat controversial vDSO hooks for
    > vsyscall-gtod. This makes LD_PRELOADing or changes to glibc unnecessary,

    the reason it's controversial is just because it's microslowing down
    all syscalls to speedup gettimeofday, when you can avoid this kernel
    change completely and implementing it zerocost like in x86-64. glibc
    should simply call into the vsyscall directly. Why don't you simply
    provide a patch against glibc, instead of proposing a patch against the
    kernel? Of course this patch will depend on your vsyscall patch on the
    kernel side, and that's fine. Another elf bitflag can be used to tell
    glibc to use vgettimeofday or whatever, just like it happens with the
    sysenter vsyscall.

    This is just like the kernel patches people proposes when they get
    vmalloc LDT allocation failure, because they run with the i686 glibc
    instead of the only possibly supported i586 configuration. It makes no
    sense to hide a glibc inefficiency in the kernel when you can fix it in
    glibc and avoid the LDT 4k allocation completely since nobody will ever
    call into pthread_create. It's not that wasting 4k of zone-normal per
    task is a good thing, and wasting 64k of vmalloc per task is a bad
    thing. they're both bad things, you just only can see the latter one
    unless you're a kernel hacker, so people actually think the kmalloc LDT
    thing is a bugfix, while it's just a bad band-aid (I mean, it's a good
    thing at large, but not as the fix of the vmalloc LDT faliures). I bet
    if the LDT allocation was visible in /proc as easily as the manger
    thread was visible with `ps` in linuxthreads, the LDT allocation would
    been deferred to pthread_create too in the first place. As a matter of
    fact I spent a few hours trying to fixup glibc some month ago, but the
    flood of #ifdefs and the fact linuxthreads is dead made me desist and I
    will try again with NTPL since it seems they didn't fix it (at least
    last time I checked the code the LDT waste as still there).
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:2.454 / U:0.052 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site