On 25/07/2023 10:18, 李筱云(李筱云) wrote:
> Hi Conor,
>>On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 12:35:15PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 11:32:12AM +0800, Amma Lee wrote:
> >> > The patch can optimize the running times of insmod command by modify ELF
> >> > relocation function.
> >> > In the 5.10 and latest kernel, when install the riscv ELF drivers which
> >> > contains multiple symbol table items to be relocated, kernel takes a lot
> >> > of time to execute the relocation. For example, we install a 3+MB driver
> >> > need 180+s.
> >> > We focus on the riscv architecture handle R_RISCV_HI20 and R_RISCV_LO20
> >> > type items relocation function in the arch\riscv\kernel\module.c and
> >> > find that there are two-loops in the function. If we modify the begin
> >> > number in the second for-loops iteration, we could save significant time
> >> > for installation. We install the same 3+MB driver could just need 2s.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Amma Lee <[email protected]>
> >> > ---
> >> > arch/riscv/kernel/module.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >> > 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >>
> >> I guess this is a v3 of [1]? But there's no change log here to know
> >> what's different.
> >>
> >> [1] [email protected]
> >
> >It's also still got the checkpatch issues (and possibly others) that
>>were pointed out previously.
>
> I'm sorry for the duplicate emails. Because we released this patch many times, the first
> patch was based on 5.10. Later we verified this issue on kernel 6.4, then we released a new
> patch based on the 6.4 kernel. Since we never got any reply, we don't know how to proceed
> with this patch.
>
> BR,
> Amma
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 发件人：Conor Dooley <[email protected]>
> 发送时间：2023年7月3日(星期一) 18:48
> 收件人：Andrew Jones <[email protected]>
> 抄 送：李筱云(李筱云) <[email protected]>; paul.walmsley <[email protected]>; palmer <[email protected]>; aou <[email protected]>; 谢振新(谢振新) <[email protected]>; linux-riscv <[email protected]>; linux-kernel <[email protected]>
> 主 题：Re: [PATCH] riscv: optimize ELF relocation function in riscv
>
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 12:35:15PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 11:32:12AM +0800, Amma Lee wrote:
> > > The patch can optimize the running times of insmod command by modify ELF
> > > relocation function.
> > > In the 5.10 and latest kernel, when install the riscv ELF drivers which
> > > contains multiple symbol table items to be relocated, kernel takes a lot
> > > of time to execute the relocation. For example, we install a 3+MB driver
> > > need 180+s.
> > > We focus on the riscv architecture handle R_RISCV_HI20 and R_RISCV_LO20
> > > type items relocation function in the arch\riscv\kernel\module.c and
> > > find that there are two-loops in the function. If we modify the begin
> > > number in the second for-loops iteration, we could save significant time
> > > for installation. We install the same 3+MB driver could just need 2s.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Amma Lee <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > arch/riscv/kernel/module.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> >
> > I guess this is a v3 of [1]? But there's no change log here to know
> > what's different.
> >
> > [1] [email protected]
>
> It's also still got the checkpatch issues (and possibly others) that
> were pointed out previously.
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.
>
> Also, when applying the patch:
> warning: arch/riscv/kernel/module.c has type 100644, expected 100755
>
>
Firstly, please no html mails. The mailing list will reject them :/
There was no changelog to indicate what is different from the prior
submissions, nor were the issues pointed out by checkpatch resolved.
It's considered impolite to post another version of a patch, without
addressing comments that were pointed out on the previous submission.
Please fix up the things pointed out by checkpatch (and please run it
with the --strict argument) and resubmit a v4, that contains a changelog
under the --- line, explaining what is different between this patch &
v4.
Thanks,
Conor.