>
> > per-processor registers that one could use (but loading a
> > general register with that per processor register would be
> > needed for access.) Also, since the PPC has lots of registers,
> > one could? permanently reserve one of the general registers (r13?).
>
> I really don't like the id
"John S. Dyson" writes:
> I just wanted to "chime in" and say that the new patches are based
> on a really good concept, and is much cleaner than the previous
> method. Also, many RISC architectures can utilize this
> method due to the availability of lots of general registers.
> (One could go
:> :julian
:>
:>I'd like to see this too. I will soon have two SMP boxes of my own to
play
:>with for my own personal use and for an upcoming project, and at least one
:>will be available for SMP life-testing purposes for several months.
:>I really want to see two things: (
On Sun, 4 Apr 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :(and what would be the equivalent ALPHA patch?)
> :I can imagine the original PDE trick working on the alpha but
> :they don't have a spare register sitting around..
do they?
> :
> :julian
>
>I'd like to see this too. I will soon have two SMP
:On Fri, 2 Apr 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
:>
:> Now, if you're not using Luoqi's patches to enable multithreaded
:> address spaces, you can stop reading here. If you are, you'll
:> need to patch i386/i386/swtch.s as follows:
:
:My suggestion is that we apply Luoqi's %fs patch to -current rather than
:
On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, John S. Dyson wrote:
> Alan Cox said:
> >
> > I've committed the basic infrastructure to improve TLB management
> > on SMPs. Translation: this will lead to the elimination of a LOT
> > of interprocessor interrupts to invalidate TLB entries. I'll be
> > "turning on" the new me
Alan Cox said:
>
> I've committed the basic infrastructure to improve TLB management
> on SMPs. Translation: this will lead to the elimination of a LOT
> of interprocessor interrupts to invalidate TLB entries. I'll be
> "turning on" the new mechanisms slowly so we can carefully debug
> each step
On Fri, 2 Apr 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Now, if you're not using Luoqi's patches to enable multithreaded
> address spaces, you can stop reading here. If you are, you'll
> need to patch i386/i386/swtch.s as follows:
My suggestion is that we apply Luoqi's %fs patch to -current rather than
have t
