[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <492DE3EF.8060507@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:03:59 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.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
Avi Kivity wrote:
> 
>> 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.
> 
Yes, I would consider that a theoretical exercise only :)
> 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?
On the entirely silly level...
CC xx
	-hpa
--
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
 
