[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1222796245.23159.38.camel@calx>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:37:25 -0500
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: Richard Kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
penberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slub: reduce total stack usage of slab_err & object_err
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 17:20 +0100, Richard Kennedy wrote:
> Yes, using vprintk is better but you still have this path :
> ( with your patch applied)
>
> object_err -> slab_bug(208) -> printk(216)
> instead of
> object_err -> slab_bug_message(8) -> printk(216)
>
> unfortunately the overhead for having var_args is pretty big, at least
> on x86_64. I haven't measured it on 32 bit yet.
That's fascinating. I tried a simple test case in userspace:
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <stdio.h>
void p(char *fmt, ...)
{
va_list args;
va_start(args, fmt);
vprintf(fmt, args);
va_end(args);
}
On 32-bit, I'm seeing 32 bytes of stack vs 216 on 64-bit. Disassembly
suggests it's connected to va_list fiddling with XMM registers, which
seems quite odd.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
--
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