Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs

From	Zhizhou Zhang <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs
Date	2016-02-19 13:10 +0100
Message-ID	<r3S2L-4Vi-37@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<r3vfQ-4SJ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3vpv-4Wo-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3J97-6Cc-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3QDE-3H6-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:30:09AM +0800, Zhi-zhou wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Catalin Marinas
>> <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 07:48:35PM +0800, Zhi-zhou Zhang wrote:
>> > > From: zhizhou <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com>
>> > >
>> > > This patch is based on the implementation of arm. The generic
>> > > current_pt_regs is implemented with current->stack. It need to access
>> > > memory that would be too expensive.
>> >
>> > Do you have any performance numbers?
>>
>> I'm using QEMU, so no. Actually this macro isn't heavily used. I just
>> think using the generic
>> implementation is not very nice. It get task_struct from sp_el0, then
>> get stack(which is
>> equal to sp_el0) from task_struct. There are two unnecessary memory accesses.
>
> I'd much rather use the generic implementation unless there's a compelling
> reason not to. "I think it's not very nice" doesn't really cut it for me!
Refer to memory twice may incur cache eviction. I'm really a newbie to
kernel. Anyway, I have a look at kernel and I'm very curious what's
the 'compelling reason' of 16 architectures implement their own
current_pt_regs?
>
> Will



-- 
Regards,
Zhizhou

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs Zhi-zhou Zhang <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 12:50 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> - 2016-02-18 13:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs Zhi-zhou <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 03:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2016-02-19 11:40 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs Zhizhou Zhang <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 13:10 +0100

csiph-web