[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200508142703.44ggcccdunchamro@treble>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 09:27:03 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, bristot@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...nel.org, namit@...are.com, hpa@...or.com, luto@...nel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/18] static_call: Allow early init
On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 03:31:56PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> New version below.
>
> ---
> Subject: static_call: Allow early init
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Date: Fri, 4 Oct 17:21:10 CEST 2019
>
> In order to use static_call() to wire up x86_pmu, we need to
> initialize earlier; copy some of the tricks from jump_label to enable
> this.
>
> Primarily we overload key->next to store a sites pointer when there
> are no modules, this avoids having to use kmalloc() to initialize the
> sites and allows us to run much earlier.
>
> (arguably, this is much much earlier than needed for perf, but it
> might allow other uses.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Looks good, I'll try to do some more testing today-ish.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists