[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170601140518.2fsgz2kp26owulcg@treble>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 09:05:18 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] x86: undwarf unwinder
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 03:50:05PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 08:08:24AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > Being able to generate more optimal code in the hottest code paths of the kernel
> > > is the _real_, primary upstream kernel benefit of a different debuginfo method -
> > > which has to be weighed against the pain of introducing a new unwinder. But this
> > > submission does not talk about that aspect at all, which should be fixed I think.
> >
> > Actually I devoted an entire one-sentence paragraph to performance in
> > the documentation:
> >
> > The simpler debuginfo format also enables the unwinder to be relatively
> > fast, which is important for perf and lockdep.
> >
> > But I'll try to highlight that a little more.
>
> That's not what I meant! The speedup comes from (hopefully) being able to disable
> CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, which:
>
> - creates simpler/faster function prologues and epilogues - no managing of RBP
> needed
>
> - gives one more generic purpose register to work from. This matters less on
> 64-bit kernels but it's a small effect.
>
> I've seen numbers of 1-2% of instruction count reduction in common kernel
> workloads, which would be pretty significant on well cached workloads.
Ah, you meant runtime performance with FP disabled. I also dedicated a
whole sentence to that one :-)
Unlike frame pointers, the debuginfo is out-of-band, so it has no
effect on runtime performance.
I'll try to flesh that out and maybe come up with some numbers.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists