[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160510190218.GH28520@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 21:02:18 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, zengzhaoxiu@....com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Zhaoxiu Zeng <zhaoxiu.zeng@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] x86/hweight: Get rid of the special calling
convention
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:23:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So what was wrong with using the normal thunk_*.S wrappers for the
> calls? That would allow you to use the alternative() stuff which does
> generate smaller code.
Yeah, so a full allyesconfig vmlinux gives ~22K .text size increase:
text data bss dec hex filename
85391772 105899159 70717440 262008371 f9dee33 vmlinux before
85413991 105899223 70746112 262059326 f9eb53e vmlinux after
--------
22219
I guess I better try the thunk stuff, might make it smaller.
Also, in the next version I'll split out the static_cpu_has() move into
a separate patch, as you requested on IRC.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists