[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiOqbuzy7xzsLrN8LXKGGUUMH109wcKOXx_PV9PkHa=Zw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 15:59:42 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
clang-built-linux <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Simplify load_unaligned_zeropad() (was Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph
updates for 5.20-rc1)
On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 3:51 PM Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
>
> Do we gain enough benefit from the microoptimization to justify existing
> load_unaligned_zeropad()? The helper has rather confusing side-effects.
It's a *big* deal in pathname handling, yes. Doing things a byte at a
time is very noticeably slower.
If TDX has problems with it, then TDX needs to be fixed. And it's
simple enough - just make sure you have a guard page between any
kernel RAM mapping and whatever odd crazy page.
There is nothing subtle about this at all. You probably would want
that guard page *anyway*.
That "uaccepted memory" type needs to be just clearly fixed.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists