From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 18:54:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 18:53:54 -0500 Received: from smtp1.cern.ch ([137.138.128.38]:22029 "EHLO smtp1.cern.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 18:53:45 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 00:53:37 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: "Richard B. Johnson" Cc: mdaljeet@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: system call handling Message-ID: <20001102005337.A9017@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from root@chaos.analogic.com on Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 07:44:03AM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Richard B. Johnson wrote: > If you designed it with just one call-gate, with one entry point, > you would have exactly what we have now except you would execute > a `call CALL_GATE` instead of `int 0x80`. This turns out to be > 6 of one and 1/2 dozen of another when it comes to performance. The final decider is that `int 0x80' is only two bytes long. -- Jamie - 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/