[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6407614.fdv5XFSBue@wuerfel>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 23:01:06 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: ynorov@...iumnetworks.com, catalin.marinas@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
pinskia@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org, joseph@...esourcery.com,
christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com,
bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com, szabolcs.nagy@....com,
klimov.linux@...il.com, Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com, agraf@...e.de,
Prasun.Kapoor@...iumnetworks.com, kilobyte@...band.pl,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, philipp.tomsich@...obroma-systems.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/23] all: syscall wrappers: add documentation
On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 1:50:39 PM CEST David Miller wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:47:33 +0200
>
> > If we use the normal calling conventions, we could remove these overrides
> > along with the respective special-case handling in glibc. None of them
> > look particularly performance-sensitive, but I could be wrong there.
>
> You could set the lowest bit in the system call entry pointer to indicate
> the upper-half clears should be elided.
Right, but that would introduce an extra conditional branch in the syscall
hotpath, and likely eliminate the gains from passing the loff_t arguments
in a single register instead of a pair.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists