[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B55ED46.40909@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:35:02 -0500
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
To: Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tcp: input header length, prediction, and timestamp
bugs
Over the weekend, I've been reviewing the .lst output that Andi
explained, and I've found a few interesting things.
1) The 4.4 compiler isn't very smart about shifts:
static inline unsigned int tcp_header_len_th(const struct tcphdr *th)
{
return th->doff * 4;
c04ea93e: 0f b6 47 0c movzbl 0xc(%edi),%eax
c04ea942: c0 e8 04 shr $0x4,%al
c04ea945: 0f b6 c0 movzbl %al,%eax
c04ea948: c1 e0 02 shl $0x2,%eax
That could easily be done as shr $0x2 instead.
2) This "fast path" code is under quite a bit of register pressure on
the 32-bit i386. There's a lot of saving and re-loading.
3) Particularly, the seldom used *th and len parameters are saved and
reloaded in the very beginning of the fast path, really wasting time.
4) Since both *th and len are actually indexed loads from *skb (which
the compiler keeps in a register most of the time), doing indexed loads
from the stack (%ebp) is the same, so they shouldn't be sent as
parameters at all!
5) There's already code, added back in 2006 for DMA, that directly
references skb->len instead of the len parameter. Probably lack of
header documentation, so the coder failed to notice:
if (copied_early)
tcp_cleanup_rbuf(sk, skb->len);
c04ead5d: 8b 56 50 mov 0x50(%esi),%edx
c04ead60: 89 d8 mov %ebx,%eax
c04ead62: e8 fc ff ff ff call c04ead63 <tcp_rcv_established+0x633>
Therefore, I'll resubmit this patch, removing the existing len parameter.
And maybe *th, too....
--
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