[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1416001382.15154.64.camel@localhost>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 22:43:02 +0100
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ogerlitz@...lanox.com, pshelar@...ira.com,
jesse@...ira.com, discuss@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Revert "fast_hash: avoid indirect function
calls"
On Fr, 2014-11-14 at 11:05 -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> This reverts commit e5a2c899957659cd1a9f789bc462f9c0b35f5150.
>
> Commit e5a2c899 introduced an alternative_call, arch_fast_hash2,
> that selects between __jhash2 and __intel_crc4_2_hash based on the
> X86_FEATURE_XMM4_2.
>
> Unfortunately, the alternative_call system does not appear to be
> suitable for use with C functions, as register usage is not handled
> properly for the called functions. The __jhash2 function in particular
> clobbers registers that are not preserved when called via
> alternative_call, resulting in a panic for direct callers of
> arch_fast_hash2 on older CPUs lacking sse4_2. It is possible that
> __intel_crc4_2_hash works merely by chance because it uses fewer
> registers.
>
> This commit was suggested as the source of the problem by Jesse
> Gross <jesse@...ira.com>.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
I am totally fine to revert this and try to come up with a better
solution.
Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Bye,
Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists