From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 18:01:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 18:01:25 -0500 Received: from vger.timpanogas.org ([207.109.151.240]:33035 "EHLO vger.timpanogas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 18:01:04 -0500 Message-ID: <39FF4E53.481B5EE2@timpanogas.org> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 15:57:23 -0700 From: "Jeff V. Merkey" Organization: TRG, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Lang CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.2.18Pre Lan Performance Rocks! In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Lang wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Jeff, one other thing. Linux is not x86 hand-crafted assembler, it's > capable of running on many platforms. are you planning on giving up this > capability or hand crafting the kernel for each chip? > > Linux on x86 is nice (and I do use it a lot) but one of the things that > makes it so useful is that when you do outgrow what youcan do on a x86 > platform you cna move to a more powerful platform without having to change > to a different OS. How about a NetWare like NOS with all the application support of Linux? I think a lot of people will love it. Novell's largest customers have told me they want to see it, and would deploy it. I do believe there's a market for such a beast. A very lucrative one... Jeff > > David Lang > > On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, > Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 15:45:45 -0700 > > From: Jeff V. Merkey > > To: Andi Kleen , mingo@elte.hu, Pavel Machek , > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: 2.2.18Pre Lan Performance Rocks! > > > > > > > > One more optimization it has. NetWare never "calls" functions in the > > kernel. There's a template of register assignments in between kernel > > modules that's very strict (esi contains a WTD head, edi has the target > > thread, etc.) and all function calls are jumps in a linear space. > > layout of all functions are 16 bytes aligned for speed, and all > > arguments in kernel are passed via registers. It's a level of > > optimization no C compiler does -- all of it was done by hand, and most > > function s in fast paths are layed out in 512 byte chunks to increases > > speed. Stack memory activity in the NetWare kernel is almost > > non-existent in almost all of the "fast paths" > > > > Jeff > > > > "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > > > > > A "context" is usually assued to be a "stack". The simplest of all > > > context switches > > > is: > > > > > > mov x, esp > > > mov esp, y > > > > > > A context switch can be as short as two instructions, or as big as a TSS > > > with CR3 hardware switching, > > > > > > i.e. > > > > > > ltr ax > > > jmp task_gate > > > > > > (500 clocks later) > > > > > > ts->eip gets exec'd > > > > > > you can also have a context switch that does an int X where X is a gate > > > or TSS. > > > > > > you can also have a context switch (like linux) that does > > > > > > mov x, esp > > > mov esp, y > > > mov z, CR3 > > > mov CR3, w > > > > > > etc. > > > > > > In NetWare, a context switch is an in-line assembly language macro that > > > is 2 instructions long for a stack switch and 4 instructions for a CR3 > > > reload -- this is a lot shorter than Linux. > > > Only EBX, EBP, ESI, and EDI are saved and this is never done in the > > > kernel, but is a natural > > > affect of the Watcom C compiler. There's also strict rules about > > > register assignments that re enforced between assembler modules in > > > NetWare to reduce the overhead of a context switch. The code path is > > > very complex in NetWare, and priorities and all this stuff exists, but > > > these code paths are segragated so these types of checks only happen > > > once in a while and check a pre-calc'd "scoreboard" that is read only > > > across processors and updated and recal'd by a timer every 18 ticks. > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > > > > Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 02:52:11PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > > > The numbers don't lie. You know where the code is. You notice that > > > > > there is a version of > > > > > the kernel hand coded in assembly language. You'l also noticed that > > > > > it's SMP and takes ZERO LOCKS during context switching, in fact, most of > > > > > the design is completely lockless. > > > > > > > > I suspect most of the confusion in this thread comes because you seem to > > > > use a different definition of context switch than Ingo and others. Could > > > > you explain what you exactly mean with a context switch ? > > > > > > > > -Andi > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP 6.5.2 > > iQEVAwUBOf9LYj7msCGEppcbAQFdZQgAocWtMwnNmmLnfSS+cGHZd8V0IFfmoVb7 > fDRoNWMmOzU5g5W8aAudQFqGpGqizBR8/AA9ziqHRfKxwoo5/nuHtEMDpfw0nV5e > ghsd7qtzv1kTk0l5zp6bN2qPlGgs7Ke72od10X6pTGDyuUDQK71YNQ9UUcCv8GEO > 2PpPOnCHw3atuQ0hetMNcFfIdvvslTB2+pcVzYxWWGhCYIeWreF8w1qf8XDYQil9 > Ih22vmu69LP03RwXkFioikVSK8F8m+31DUBA67exN+R4qXy8+U5ZtyPQ+onIeguh > SnADBNjGjWK2mPyLNSVyAwH6EsIaGzk1QJ5hYULzVFi4zVl3pyRi8w== > =91LL > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/