[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1178102706.2440.9.camel@localhost>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 12:45:06 +0200
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 20/38] Minor fault path optimization.
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 09:34 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Well, here's my powerpc patch to do the direct call that I sent out
> a few weeks ago. It not just speed up the pagefault path a lot,
> but also is a major code cleanup. Andi and Anton didn't like it
> because they have ambition for murky debugger code to possibly
> use it one day..
I thought about using a direct call for s390 as well. The advantage of a
direct call is that it avoids the overhead of a notifier call even if
kprobes is running. The disadvantage is that there cannot be a second
consumer of the fault notifications. I choose the middle way: avoid the
overhead if kprobes is not active and use the full notifier if kprobes
is running. It should not hurt the performance too badly since
kprobe_running is only true if the cpu gets a page fault while executing
a kprobe.
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists