[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49790BCC.1040807@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:14:04 -0800
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
CC: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"jeremy@...source.com" <jeremy@...source.com>,
"chrisw@...s-sol.org" <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
"rusty@...tcorp.com.au" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: lmbench lat_mmap slowdown with CONFIG_PARAVIRT
Zachary Amsden wrote:
> What about removing the identity functions entirely. They are useless,
> really. All that is needed is a patch site filled with nops for Xen to
> overwrite, just stuffing the value into the proper registers. For
> 64-bit, it can be a simple mov to satisfy the constraints.
>
I think it comes to the same thing really. Both end up generating a
series of nops with values entering and leaving in well-defined
registers. The x86-64 calling convention is a bit awkward because the
first arg is in rdi and the ret is rax, so it can't quite be pure nops,
or we use a non-standard calling-convention with appropriate thunks to
call into C code. I think a mov is a better performance-complexity
tradeoff.
>> Also, I just posted patches to get rid of all pvops calls when fetching
>> or setting flags in a pte, which I hope will help.
>>
>
> Sounds like it will help.
>
...but apparently not.
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