[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231115190938.GGZVUXcuUjI3i1JRAB@fat_crate.local>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 20:09:38 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev, lkp@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, ying.huang@...el.com,
feng.tang@...el.com, fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [iov_iter] c9eec08bac: vm-scalability.throughput
-16.9% regression
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 01:38:18PM -0500, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> It's probably completely broken. I particularly worry about "memcpy()"
> being used *during* the instruction rewriting, so the whole approach
> with ALTERNATIVE() is probably entirely broken.
Should we define an alternative_memcpy() which is used *only* during
rewriting so that this becomes a non-issue?
> But I'm cc'ing Borislav, because we've talked about the whole "inline
> memcpy() with alternatives" before, so maybe this gives Borislav some
> ideas for how to do it right.
Yours looks simple enough and makes sense. Lemme poke at it a bit in the
coming days and see what happens.
> Borislav, see
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wjCUckvZUQf7gqp2ziJUWxVpikM_6srFdbcNdBJTxExRg@mail.gmail.com/
>
> for some truly crazy code generation by gcc.
Yeah, lemme show that to gcc folks. That asm is with your compiler,
right? Version?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists