linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do

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]

Date:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 04:52:22 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and
 call_do_softirq() on PPC32

On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 05:20:04PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are simple enough to be
> worth inlining.
> 
> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack.
> It also allows GCC to keep the saved ksp_limit in an nonvolatile reg.
> 
> This is inspired from S390 arch. Several other arches do more or
> less the same. The way sparc arch does seems odd thought.

Any reason you only do this for 32-bit and not 64-bit as well?