[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52091FB9.4080805@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 10:47:37 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, gcc <gcc@....gnu.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>,
Behan Webster <behanw@...verseincode.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] gcc feature request: Moving blocks into sections
On 08/12/2013 09:09 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>> On the majority of architectures, including x86, you cannot simply copy
>> a piece of code elsewhere and have it still work.
>
> I thought we used -fPIC which would allow just that.
>
Doubly wrong. The kernel is not compiled with -fPIC, nor does -fPIC
allow this kind of movement for code that contains intramodule
references (that is *all* references in the kernel). Since we really
doesn't want to burden the kernel with a GOT and a PLT, that is life.
>> You end up doing a
>> bunch of the work that a JIT would do anyway, and would end up with
>> considerably higher complexity and worse results than a true JIT.
>
> Well, less complexity but worse result, yes. We'd only poke the specific
> static_branch sites with either NOPs or the (relative) jump target for
> each of these branches. Then copy the result.
Once again, you can't "copy the result". You end up with a full
disassembler.
-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