[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180129063919.GA20230@1wt.eu>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 07:39:19 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH stable 4.9 1/8] x86: bpf_jit: small optimization in
emit_bpf_tail_call()
Hi,
[ replaced stable@ and greg@ by netdev@ as my question below is not
relevant to stable ]
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:48:54AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>
> [ upstream commit 84ccac6e7854ebbfb56d2fc6d5bef9be49bb304c ]
>
> Saves 4 bytes replacing following instructions :
>
> lea rax, [rsi + rdx * 8 + offsetof(...)]
> mov rax, qword ptr [rax]
> cmp rax, 0
>
> by :
>
> mov rax, [rsi + rdx * 8 + offsetof(...)]
> test rax, rax
I've just noticed this on stable@. If these 4 bytes matter, why not use
cmpq with an immediate value instead, which saves 2 extra bytes ? :
- the mov above is 11 bytes total :
0: 48 8b 84 d6 78 56 34 mov 0x12345678(%rsi,%rdx,8),%rax
7: 12
8: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax
- the equivalent cmp is only 9 bytes :
0: 48 83 bc d6 78 56 34 cmpq $0x0,0x12345678(%rsi,%rdx,8)
7: 12 00
And as a bonus, it doesn't even clobber rax.
Just my two cents,
Willy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists