[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whQJ-gj2M4ZJj8LnZXBK9k3fiRVjAXD9+M5D2Ja+N2mug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 13:10:47 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:05 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, my suggestion doesn't allow for batching, since it would
> > basically generate one trampoline for every rewritten instruction.
>
> Sure it does. Just make 1000 trampolines and patch 1000 sites in a
> batch :) As long as the number of trampolines is smallish (e.g. fits
> in a page), then we should be in good shape.
Yeah, I guess that's true.
But let's not worry about it. I don't think we do batching for any
alternative instruction rewriting right now, do we?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists