Timothy Miller wrote:
> If your program is capable of handling an address with more than 32
> bits, what point is there giving a hint? Either your program can handle
> 64-bit pointers or it cannot. Any program flexible enough to handle
> either size dynamically would expend enough overhead checking that it
> would be worse than if it just made a hard choice.
Look at the x86-64 context switching code. If memory addressed by the
GDT entries has a 32-bit address it uses a different method than for
cases where the virtual address has more than 32 bits. This way of
handling GDT entries is faster according to ak. So, it's not a
correctness thing, it's a performance thing.
- --
- --------------. ,-. 444 Castro Street
Ulrich Drepper \ ,-----------------' \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA
Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `---------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+vCo82ijCOnn/RHQRAlGzAJ9Ti80kJMeecyxGikowWcfCAq0stwCfRVcQ
Clui3Z6yKNSy3mu+phrY2FQ=
=GFwi
-----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
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/