From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A09BB81 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:11:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k2L3BXaR010578 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:11:33 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA19945 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:11:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (xproxy.gmail.com [66.249.82.200]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k2L3BVdW021625 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:11:32 +0100 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i27so892231wxd for ; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:11:31 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=QpNgU61ckRg2Uwr2mVKm/c/dJ4ZH6YKp2gczC6ngInZVngrUGegBOacXTrub6s2DCAiMbCVimoRVEGRFrcggO+8dt/syiX6OLZf94JNtnkaoUeRYXumRaJNu7zIMRx1Yp3aevxyKROEB9sVU7JqM0R2USINCnSvp9DufRiGkiH4= Received: by 10.70.22.5 with SMTP id 5mr3016664wxv; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:11:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.57.14 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:11:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:11:31 -0500 From: "Markus Mottl" To: "Robert Roessler" Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Severe loss of performance due to new signal handling Cc: Caml-list In-Reply-To: <441F57FD.90206@rftp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2827_9195684.1142910691229" References: <441E760D.6010801@inria.fr> <441F57FD.90206@rftp.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 441F6EE5.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 441F6EE3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; markus:01 mottl:01 markus:01 mottl:01 assertion:01 os-dependent:01 byterun:01 ocaml:01 assertion:01 os-dependent:01 byterun:01 ocaml:01 nail:98 nail:98 W8:98 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, INFO_TLD,RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 ------=_Part_2827_9195684.1142910691229 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 3/20/06, Robert Roessler wrote: > > At the risk of being "irrelevant", I wanted to nail down exactly what > assertion is being made here: are we talking about directly executing > in assembly code the relevant x86[-64]/ppc/whatever instructions for > "read-and-clear", or going through OS-dependent access routines like > Windows' InterlockedExchange()? We are talking of the assembly code. See file byterun/signals_machdep.h, which contains the corresponding macros. Regards, Markus -- Markus Mottl http://www.ocaml.info markus.mottl@gmail.com ------=_Part_2827_9195684.1142910691229 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 3/20/06, Robert Roessler <roessler@rftp.com> wrote:
At the risk of being "irrelevant", I wanted to nail down exactly = what
assertion is being made here: are we talking about directly executi= ng
in assembly code the relevant x86[-64]/ppc/whatever instructions for
"read-and-clear", or going through OS-dependent access routin= es like
Windows' InterlockedExchange()?

We are talking of the assembly code.  See file byterun/signals_machdep= .h, which contains the corresponding macros.

Regards,
Markus

--
Markus Mottl        http://www.ocaml.info      &n= bsp; markus.mottl@gmail.com<= /a> ------=_Part_2827_9195684.1142910691229--