[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5512FC15.30209@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 19:19:01 +0100
From: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/asm/entry/64: do not TRACE_IRQS fast SYSRET64
path
On 03/25/2015 07:04 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> SYSRET code path has a small irq-off block.
>>>> On this code path, TRACE_IRQS_ON can't be called right before interrupts
>>>> are enabled for real, we can't clobber registers there.
>>>> So current code does it earlier, in a safe place.
>>>>
>>>> But with this, TRACE_IRQS_OFF/ON frames just two fast instructions,
>>>> which is ridiculous: now most of irq-off block is _outside_ of the framing.
>>>>
>>>> Do the same thing that we do on SYSCALL entry: do not track this irq-off block,
>>>> it is very small to ever cause noticeable irq latency.
>>>>
>>>> Be careful: make sure that "jnz int_ret_from_sys_call_irqs_off" now does
>>>> invoke TRACE_IRQS_OFF - move int_ret_from_sys_call_irqs_off label before
>>>> TRACE_IRQS_OFF.
>>>
>>>> @@ -345,8 +346,8 @@ tracesys_phase2:
>>>> */
>>>> GLOBAL(int_ret_from_sys_call)
>>>> DISABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_NONE)
>>>> - TRACE_IRQS_OFF
>>>> int_ret_from_sys_call_irqs_off:
>>>> + TRACE_IRQS_OFF
>>>> movl $_TIF_ALLWORK_MASK,%edi
>>>> /* edi: mask to check */
>>>
>>> This latter trick absolutely needs a comment, to keep future lockdep
>>> developers from wondering about the mismatch and the weird label
>>> placement ...
>>
>> Unsure how to format it.
>>
>> How about:
>>
>>
>> DISABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_NONE)
>> int_ret_from_sys_call_irqs_off: /* jumps come here with irqs off */
>> TRACE_IRQS_OFF
>
> Why not something like 'jumps come here from the irqs-off SYSRET
> path'?
Ok. I'll send v2 for patches 1 and 2.
(Patch 1 will be expanded, there is another instance of jump
needing the same treatment.)
>>
>>
>>
>> (In truth, there is only one jump as of now, but using pliral
>> "jumps" if that would change)
>
> I'd also put a comment to the actual sysret IRQ-disablement that we
> are skipping with the annotation.
Patch does add such a comment:
+ /*
+ * We do not frame this tiny irq-off block with TRACE_IRQS_OFF/ON,
+ * it is too small to ever cause noticeable irq latency.
+ */
--
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