DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
         :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
        b=JQYEFCRV6qw8G+Obf2a/aCHFufo5B/xjBwjszSIhhDuH9PZe746qgsrVtxBt+N/WIJ
         SvJ3loEAMtvRbifkPNZamhKpEb2SWUkbmq+bjtTcqNcy8ptabEgi6T6MmfuRoWHMSjrk
         8ad09YGijuzDDClrHjvTwGUQ00x+Ew+WQGabw=
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:26:45 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] [PATCH 1/5] function-graph/x86: replace unbalanced
	ret with jmp
Message-ID: <20091013222644.GB4952@nowhere>
References: <20091013203349.814936710@goodmis.org> <20091013203425.042034383@goodmis.org> <20091013210208.GB5135@nowhere> <1255468366.7113.2403.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1255468366.7113.2403.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1885
Lines: 43

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 05:12:46PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 23:02 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 04:33:50PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
> > > 
> > > The function graph tracer replaces the return address with a hook to
> > > trace the exit of the function call. This hook will finish by returning
> > > to the real location the function should return to.
> > > 
> > > But the current implementation uses a ret to jump to the real return
> > > location. This causes a imbalance between calls and ret. That is
> > > the original function does a call, the ret goes to the handler
> > > and then the handler does a ret without a matching call.
> > > 
> > > Although the function graph tracer itself still breaks the branch
> > > predictor by replacing the original ret, by using a second ret and
> > > causing an imbalance, it breaks the predictor even more.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have troubles to understand by it breaks the predictor, especially
> > since there is not conditional branch in return_to_handler.
> > But still I don't understand why a ret would break more the branch
> > prediction than a jmp.
> 
> Calls are branch prediction jumps. Which associates the "ret" with the
> call. As it approaches the ret, it starts to receive the code after the
> call.
> 
> But this is stack order. Every call should hit one ret. But with the
> original code, we break this stack. We have one call and two rets. Which
> means that the branch prediction will also get messed up with the
> previous stored call.


Oh, ok I got it.
Thanks.

--
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/