[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190103234029.GH6118@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 15:40:29 -0800
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/6] x86: introduce kernel restartable sequence
> Thanks for the explanations. I don’t think it would work (e.g., IRQs). I can
> avoid generalizing and just detect the "magic sequence” of the code, but let
> me give it some more thought.
If you ask me I would just use compiler profile feedback or autofdo (if your
compiler has a working version)
The compiler can do a much better job at optimizing this than you ever could.
Manual FDO needs some kernel patching though.
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists