linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/topology: One function call less in build_group_from_child_sched

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20190708142736.GC10675@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 Jul 2019 19:57:36 +0530
From:   Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
Cc:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/topology: One function call less in
 build_group_from_child_sched_domain()

* Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <lkml@...ux.net> [2019-07-08 11:38:58]:

> > 
> > At runtime, Are we avoiding a function call?
> > However I think we are avoiding a branch instead of a conditional, which may
> > be beneficial.
> 
> If you're assuming the compiler doesn't already optimize that (no idea
> whether gcc really does that).
> 
> @Markus: could you check what gcc is actually generating out of both the
> old and your new version ?
> 
> 

I had already tried looking at the object files both on X86 and PowerPc and
in both cases (with and without patch) the generated code differs.

> --mtx
> 
> -- 
> Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
> Free software and Linux embedded engineering
> info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287
> 

-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju