[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48752CF0.20908@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:26:08 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Either way, I really suspect that the right thing to do is to use
> negative offsets, with the possible exception of a handful of things
> (40 bytes or less, perhaps like current) which can get small positive
> offsets and end up in the "super hot" cacheline.
>
> The sucky part is that I don't believe GNU ld has native support for a
> "hanging down" section (one which has a fixed endpoint rather than a
> starting point), so it requires extra magic around the link (or
> finding some way to do it with linker script functions.)
If you're going to do another linker pass, you could have a script to
extract all the percpu symbols and generate a set of derived zero-based
ones and then link against that.
Or generate a vmlinux with relocations and "relocate" all the percpu
symbols down to 0.
J
--
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