Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757551AbYHMSpn (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:45:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751703AbYHMSpf (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:45:35 -0400 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([212.179.150.194]:38722 "EHLO il.qumranet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751182AbYHMSpe (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:45:34 -0400 Message-ID: <48A32BCF.40300@qumranet.com> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:45:35 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: Linus Torvalds , Mathieu Desnoyers , Steven Rostedt , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , David Miller , Roland McGrath , Ulrich Drepper , Rusty Russell , Gregory Haskins , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" , Clark Williams Subject: Re: Efficient x86 and x86_64 NOP microbenchmarks References: <20080808190506.GD11376@Krystal> <87tzdv2g05.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <489CE90D.1040902@goop.org> <20080813175213.GA8679@Krystal> <20080813184142.GM1366@one.firstfloor.org> In-Reply-To: <20080813184142.GM1366@one.firstfloor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1192 Lines: 28 Andi Kleen wrote: > So for me the best strategy would be to get rid of the frame pointer > and ignore the nops. This unfortunately would require going away > from -pg and instead post process gcc output to insert "call mcount" > manually. But the nice advantage of that is that you could actually > set up a custom table of callers built in a ELF section and with > that you don't actually need the runtime patching (which is only > done currently because there's no global table of mcount calls), > but could do everything in stop_machine(). Without > runtime patching you also don't need single part nops. > > I think that would be the best option. I especially like it because > it would prevent forcing frame pointer which seems to be costlier > than any kinds of nosp. > > How would you deal with inlines? Using debug information? -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/