[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyv2tj1YQH3Ga4oAkNEZgsT2+KmuU_MYqN0aUUtkBygrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:48:00 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Sara Sharon <sara.sharon@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: Petition Intel/AMD to add POPF_IF insn
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>
> It shouldn't be *too* bad, since xen_restore_fl only affects "IF".
> And even if native_restore_fl needs to be able to turn IRQs off as
> well as on, we can just do:
>
> if (likely(flags & X86_EFLAGS_IF))
> sti();
> else
> cli();
>
> at some cost to code size but hopefully little to no runtime cost for
> the sane cases.
No, that would be horrible for the case where we had an irq spinlock
in an irq-region. Then we'd have a pointless "cli" there.
So I'd rather just make sure that only the spinlock code actually uses
native_restore_fl().
And yes, the patch works at least minimally, since I'm writing this
with a kernel compiled with that.
Of course, somebody really should do timings on modern CPU's (in cpl0,
comparing native_fl() that enables interrupts with a popf)
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists