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:   Tue, 2 Apr 2019 10:51:49 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 15/14] x86/dumpstack/64: Speedup in_exception_stack()
Message-ID: <20190402155149.c23ivzzc5hyykokl@treble>
References: <20190331214020.836098943@linutronix.de>
 <20190331215136.039902969@linutronix.de>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904021214340.1676@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <20190402154329.scp7i7uqevubgwrz@treble>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904021746080.1676@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904021746080.1676@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 05:48:56PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > With the above "(stk <= begin || stk >= end)" check, removing the loop
> > becomes not all that important since exception stack dumps are quite
> > rare and not performance sensitive.  With all the macros this code
> > becomes a little more obtuse, so I'm not sure whether removal of the
> > loop is a net positive.
> 
> What about perf? It's NMI context and probably starts from there. Peter?

I believe perf unwinds starting from the regs from the context which was
interrupted by the NMI.

-- 
Josh