New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Don't switch to the C stack when there is room on the Rust stack #4480

Closed
brson opened this Issue Jan 14, 2013 · 6 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@brson
Contributor

brson commented Jan 14, 2013

If there is sufficient room on the Rust stack to run a particular foreign function then we don't need to switch stacks. Each scheduler has a native stack size so we just need the Rust segment to be larger than that (and they can be much larger).

At that point we can annotate specific functions in core with their required stack size. It could significantly reduce the number of stack switches we do.

@brson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@brson

brson Jan 14, 2013

Contributor

Related to #4479

Contributor

brson commented Jan 14, 2013

Related to #4479

@graydon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@graydon

graydon Apr 30, 2013

Contributor

@pcwalton is this in-scope or related to what you're doing in 0.7?

Contributor

graydon commented Apr 30, 2013

@pcwalton is this in-scope or related to what you're doing in 0.7?

@graydon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@graydon

graydon Apr 30, 2013

Contributor

assigning bug; change assignment if you disagree

Contributor

graydon commented Apr 30, 2013

assigning bug; change assignment if you disagree

@ghost ghost assigned pcwalton Apr 30, 2013

@brson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@brson

brson Jun 29, 2013

Contributor

Not going to make 0.7

Contributor

brson commented Jun 29, 2013

Not going to make 0.7

@bblum

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bblum

bblum Jul 3, 2013

Contributor

I remember thinking about this case a bit during my starter project last summer. This is definitely a feasible optimization, but you have to be careful(?) in the case where C calls back to Rust (what was once charmingly called "crust" functions).

nominating production-ready

Contributor

bblum commented Jul 3, 2013

I remember thinking about this case a bit during my starter project last summer. This is definitely a feasible optimization, but you have to be careful(?) in the case where C calls back to Rust (what was once charmingly called "crust" functions).

nominating production-ready

@graydon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@graydon

graydon Aug 1, 2013

Contributor

subsumed in #3678

Contributor

graydon commented Aug 1, 2013

subsumed in #3678

@graydon graydon closed this Aug 1, 2013

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment