On 01/08/2013 04:08 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The translator sources (as and when we implement a
> TCG QEMU target for this) should live under the existing target-arm.
Of this I'm not certain, given that A64 is different enough from A32
to warrant a brand new gcc backend. I havn't tried to rever
On 07/08/2011 12:33 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> I'm not sure I agree. We're talking about extremely lightweight
> functions here, in the order of a very few assembly instructions only.
> Adding a significant overhead relative to their cost is not very
> appealing.
...
> But my point is that the
On 07/08/2011 09:55 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> Talking to Will Deacon about this, it sounds like there may be little
> appetite for VDSO-ifying the vectors page unless there's a real, concrete
> benefit.
>
> Making the libc startup's job slightly easier probably doesn't count
> as such a benefit, bu
On 07/08/2011 01:23 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> There is a slight performance hit to using a VDSO in that each entry
> will need to go through the PLT rather than jumping directly to the
> helper function in the kernel.
Yes. But IMO the flexibility gained is worth it.
r~
On 07/07/2011 04:21 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>> We could possibly wrap the vectors page to make it look like a DSO in
>> a forwards-compatible way, but since this has not happened so far it
>> feels like people never saw much benefit.
>
> Any idea how big a job that is?
It's slightly tricky to ge
