Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 5 Oct 2018 13:20:10 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc:     Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>, "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/10] x86: refcount: prevent gcc distortions
Message-ID: <20181005112010.GC10285@zn.tnic>
References: <20181003213100.189959-5-namit@vmware.com>
 <20181004075755.GA3353@gmail.com>
 <20181004083333.GA9802@gmail.com>
 <10D29A50-C352-4407-A824-0C3C06CD8592@zytor.com>
 <A5DED74C-A95A-48D8-AF68-39E23696385F@vmware.com>
 <20181004091222.GB21864@gmail.com>
 <D42AB116-BFA4-4CF0-BF45-41C579A9B4C7@vmware.com>
 <20181004094519.GA97692@gmail.com>
 <29591D3B-D49B-4D7A-B280-85A2C3F63F9C@vmware.com>
 <20181005093108.GA24723@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181005093108.GA24723@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 11:31:08AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Are you using defconfig or a reasonable distro-config for your tests?
> > 
> > I think it is best to take the kernel and run localyesconfig for testing.
> 
> Ok, agreed - and this makes the numbers you provided pretty representative.
> 
> Good - now that all of my concerns were addressed I'd like to merge the remaining 3 patches as 
> well - but they are conflicting with ongoing x86 work in tip:x86/core. The extable conflict is 
> trivial, the jump-label conflict a bit more involved.

FWIW, gcc guys are not too averse to the idea of enhancing gcc inline
asm syntax with a statement which specifies its size so that gcc can use
it to do better inlining cost estimation than counting lines.

Lemme work the process ...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.