Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 03:12:32AM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > Ingo Molnar writes: > > * Rusty Russell wrote: > > > >> Peter Zijlstra writes: > >> > This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). > >> > >> Acked-by: Rusty Russell (module parts) > >> > >> Since all the

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 03:12:32AM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org writes: * Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote: Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org writes: This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). Acked-by: Rusty Russell

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-08 Thread Rusty Russell
Ingo Molnar writes: > * Rusty Russell wrote: > >> Peter Zijlstra writes: >> > This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). >> >> Acked-by: Rusty Russell (module parts) >> >> Since all the interesting stuff is not module-specific, assume this >> is via Ingo? Otherwise,

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-08 Thread Rusty Russell
Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org writes: * Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote: Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org writes: This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). Acked-by: Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au (module parts) Since all the interesting stuff is

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Rusty Russell wrote: > Peter Zijlstra writes: > > This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). > > Acked-by: Rusty Russell (module parts) > > Since all the interesting stuff is not module-specific, assume this > is via Ingo? Otherwise, I'll take it... I can certainly

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-07 Thread Rusty Russell
Peter Zijlstra writes: > This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). Acked-by: Rusty Russell (module parts) Since all the interesting stuff is not module-specific, assume this is via Ingo? Otherwise, I'll take it... Thanks, Rusty. > > The reason for doing so is that most

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote: Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org writes: This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). Acked-by: Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au (module parts) Since all the interesting stuff is not module-specific, assume this is

Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-07 Thread Rusty Russell
Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org writes: This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). Acked-by: Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au (module parts) Since all the interesting stuff is not module-specific, assume this is via Ingo? Otherwise, I'll take it... Thanks, Rusty.

[PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-06 Thread Peter Zijlstra
This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). The reason for doing so is that most stack unwinders use kernel_text_address() to validate each frame. Perf and ftrace (can) end up doing a lot of stack traces from performance sensitive code. On the way there it: - annotates and

[PATCH v6 0/9] latched RB-trees and __module_address()

2015-05-06 Thread Peter Zijlstra
This series is aimed at making __module_address() go fast(er). The reason for doing so is that most stack unwinders use kernel_text_address() to validate each frame. Perf and ftrace (can) end up doing a lot of stack traces from performance sensitive code. On the way there it: - annotates and