[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160615080327.GA15894@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 10:03:27 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86: Rewrite switch_to() code
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Move the low-level context switch code to an out-of-line asm stub instead of
> > using complex inline asm. This allows constructing a new stack frame for the
> > child process to make it seamlessly flow to ret_from_fork without an extra
> > test and branch in __switch_to(). It also improves code generation for
> > __schedule() by using the C calling convention instead of clobbering all
> > registers.
>
> Just a heads up: I'm writing some code that conflicts with this patch. The
> conflict will be easy to resolve, and, if this patch beats mine to -tip, I'll
> rebase.
So I was expecting another iteration of this switch_to() series, but had no
fundamental objections to the concept.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists