[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <492DC13F.8020009@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:35:59 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>, lguest@...abs.org,
jeremy@...source.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Lguest] [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes
> Here is a prototype patch of the compressed IRQ stubs -- this patch
> compresses them down to 7 stubs per 32-byte cache line (or part of cache
> line) at the expense of a back-to-back jmp which has the potential of
> being ugly on some pipelines (we can only get 4 stubs into 32 bytes
> without that).
>
You could actually get 4-byte stubs, using a 16-bit call (66 e8 ww ww).
But it would be slower, since we won't be pairing it with a ret.
I suspect we could get it down to three bytes, by sharing the last byte
of the four-byte call sequence with the first byte of the next:
66 e8 ff 66 e8 fc 66 e8 f9 66 e8 f6 ...
Every three bytes a new stub begins; it's a four-byte call to offset
0x6703 relative to the beginning of the first stub.
Can anyone better 24 bits/stub?
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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