On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 07:36:40PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:40:58PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > Blergh; so looking at more asm there's still a few tricks we cannot do.
> > > So while overall size is down,
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 07:36:40PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:40:58PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > Blergh; so looking at more asm there's still a few tricks we cannot do.
> > > So while overall size is down, some paths do end up
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:40:58PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > Blergh; so looking at more asm there's still a few tricks we cannot do.
> > So while overall size is down, some paths do end up more expensive. (It
> > typically boils down to
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:40:58PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > Blergh; so looking at more asm there's still a few tricks we cannot do.
> > So while overall size is down, some paths do end up more expensive. (It
> > typically boils down to creative use of condition
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Blergh; so looking at more asm there's still a few tricks we cannot do.
> So while overall size is down, some paths do end up more expensive. (It
> typically boils down to creative use of condition flags, which is very
> hard in C)
It can be done
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Blergh; so looking at more asm there's still a few tricks we cannot do.
> So while overall size is down, some paths do end up more expensive. (It
> typically boils down to creative use of condition flags, which is very
> hard in C)
It can be done using ISO
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 06:13:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So I've been playing with this again because Jason's atomic_long_t
> patches made a mess of things.
>
> (similar findings for both ia64 and s390, suggesting killing all
> arch/*/include/asm/rwsem.h might actuyally be an option).
>
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 06:13:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So I've been playing with this again because Jason's atomic_long_t
> patches made a mess of things.
>
> (similar findings for both ia64 and s390, suggesting killing all
> arch/*/include/asm/rwsem.h might actuyally be an option).
>
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 09:10:16AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
> > code flow. This however requires that it has go over an
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 09:10:16AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
> > code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
> > for the slow path
On Wed 03-02-16 09:10:16, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
> > code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
> > for the slow path
* Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
> code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
> for the slow path call_rwsem_down_write_failed which has to
> save_common_regs/restore_common_regs
* Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
> code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
> for the slow path call_rwsem_down_write_failed which has to
>
On Wed 03-02-16 09:10:16, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
> > code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
> > for
From: Michal Hocko
x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
for the slow path call_rwsem_down_write_failed which has to
save_common_regs/restore_common_regs to preserve the calling convention.
From: Michal Hocko
x86 implementation of __down_write is using inline asm to optimize the
code flow. This however requires that it has go over an additional hop
for the slow path call_rwsem_down_write_failed which has to
save_common_regs/restore_common_regs to preserve the
16 matches
Mail list logo