On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 12:57:17PM +0100, Martin Guy wrote:
> >> If it's any consolation, its userland thread switches between
> >> the same process are much faster than the NPTL kernel version at
> >> present (fixes are in course, if not already mainline).
> >
> >Hm? What is this referring to?
>
> When I pulled out, switches between different threads on ARM NPTL
> implied the same overhead as a process switch,
Hmm. No?
>From include/asm-arm/mmu_context.h:
static inline void
switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
struct task_struct *tsk)
{
unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
if (prev != next) {
cpu_set(cpu, next->cpu_vm_mask);
check_context(next);
cpu_switch_mm(next->pgd, next);
if (cache_is_vivt())
cpu_clear(cpu, prev->cpu_vm_mask);
}
}
I.e. when we switch to a task that uses the same mm (i.e. a thread of
the same process), we don't actually call ->switch_mm().
(switch_mm() is the CPU core-specific routine that flushes the D cache
and invalidates the I cache (if they are virtual caches), invalidates
the TLBs, etc.)
This is true for both NPTL and linuxthreads.
> WIth linuxthreads instead, no kernel context switch happens cos it's
> all done within one Unix process anyway, no?
No, that is not true.
Both NPTL and linuxthreads are 1:1 threading models, i.e. every thread
in your app corresponds to a process/thread on the host.
You might be confused with the older NGPT (Next-Generation POSIX
Threads thread library), which is a userland thread package which
_does_ run multiple application threads in the same task. It
never really caught on.
> I can try and dig up the mail thread if that'll help
That would definitely help, please do.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
