From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 20:48:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <F773CB3F-992B-4BC9-9376-72300BBA550B@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190110203207.3k43gt4kcvry7us7@treble>
> On Jan 10, 2019, at 12:32 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 07:45:26PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>>> I’m not GCC expert either and writing this code was not making me full of
>>>> joy, etc.. I’ll be happy that my code would be reviewed, but it does work. I
>>>> don’t think an early pass is needed, as long as hardware registers were not
>>>> allocated.
>>>>
>>>>> Would it work with more than 5 arguments, where args get passed on the
>>>>> stack?
>>>>
>>>> It does.
>>>>
>>>>> At the very least, it would (at least partially) defeat the point of the
>>>>> callee-saved paravirt ops.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I think you can even deal with callee-saved functions and remove
>>>> all the (terrible) macros. You would need to tell the extension not to
>>>> clobber the registers through a new attribute.
>>>
>>> Ok, it does sound interesting then. I assume you'll be sharing the
>>> code?
>>
>> Of course. If this what is going to convince, I’ll make a small version for
>> PV callee-saved first.
>
> It wasn't *only* the PV callee-saved part which interested me, so if you
> already have something which implements the other parts, I'd still like
> to see it.
Did you have a look at https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181231072112.21051-4-namit@vmware.com/ ?
See the changes to x86_call_markup_plugin.c .
The missing part (that I just finished but need to cleanup) is attributes
that allow you to provide key and dynamically enable the patching.
>>>>> What if we just used a plugin in a simpler fashion -- to do call site
>>>>> alignment, if necessary, to ensure the instruction doesn't cross
>>>>> cacheline boundaries. This could be done in a later pass, with no side
>>>>> effects other than code layout. And it would allow us to avoid
>>>>> breakpoints altogether -- again, assuming somebody can verify that
>>>>> intra-cacheline call destination writes are atomic with respect to
>>>>> instruction decoder reads.
>>>>
>>>> The plugin should not be able to do so. Layout of the bytecode is done by
>>>> the assembler, so I don’t think a plugin would help you with this one.
>>>
>>> Actually I think we could use .bundle_align_mode for this purpose:
>>>
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceware.org%2Fbinutils%2Fdocs-2.31%2Fas%2FBundle-directives.html&data=02%7C01%7Cnamit%40vmware.com%7Cbc4dcc541474462da00b08d6773ab61f%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C636827491388051263&sdata=HZNPN4UygwQCqsX8dOajaNeDZyy1O0O4cYeSwu%2BIdO0%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> Hm… I don’t understand what you have in mind (i.e., when would this
>> assembly directives would be emitted).
>
> For example, it could replace
>
> callq ____static_call_tramp_my_key
>
> with
>
> .bundle_align_mode 6
> callq ____static_call_tramp_my_key
> .bundle_align_mode 0
>
> which ensures the instruction is within a cache line, aligning it with
> NOPs if necessary. That would allow my current implementation to
> upgrade out-of-line calls to inline calls 100% of the time, instead of
> 95% of the time.
Heh. I almost wrote based no the feature description that this will add
unnecessary padding no matter what, but actually (experimentally) it works
well…
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-10 20:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-09 22:59 [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] compiler.h: Make __ADDRESSABLE() symbol truly unique Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] static_call: Add basic static call infrastructure Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 14:03 ` Edward Cree
2019-01-10 18:37 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] x86/static_call: Add out-of-line static call implementation Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 0:16 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 16:28 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] static_call: Add inline static call infrastructure Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/alternative: Use a single access in text_poke() where possible Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 9:32 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 17:20 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 17:29 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 17:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-01-10 17:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-01-10 17:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-01-10 18:04 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-01-10 18:21 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 18:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-01-11 12:10 ` Alexandre Chartre
2019-01-11 15:28 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 16:46 ` Alexandre Chartre
2019-01-11 16:57 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 17:41 ` Jason Baron
2019-01-11 17:54 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-15 11:10 ` Alexandre Chartre
2019-01-15 16:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-01-15 16:45 ` Alexandre Chartre
2019-01-11 0:59 ` hpa
2019-01-11 1:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-01-11 8:13 ` hpa
2019-01-09 22:59 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] x86/static_call: Add inline static call implementation for x86-64 Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 1:21 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 16:44 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 17:32 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 18:18 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 19:45 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 20:32 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 20:48 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2019-01-10 20:57 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 21:47 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-10 17:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-10 20:51 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-10 20:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-10 20:52 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-10 23:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-11 0:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-01-11 1:47 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 15:15 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 15:48 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 16:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 17:23 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 19:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-11 19:17 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 19:23 ` hpa
2019-01-11 19:33 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 19:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-13 0:34 ` hpa
2019-01-13 0:36 ` hpa
2019-01-11 19:39 ` Jiri Kosina
2019-01-14 2:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-14 2:40 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-14 20:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-01-14 22:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-14 22:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-15 3:05 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-01-15 5:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-15 5:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-01-14 23:27 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-01-14 23:51 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-15 2:28 ` hpa
2019-01-11 20:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 20:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-11 20:31 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 20:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-11 21:05 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-01-11 21:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-01-11 21:32 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-14 12:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-11 21:22 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 21:23 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 21:25 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 21:36 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 21:41 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-11 21:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-01-11 21:59 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-11 21:56 ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-12 23:54 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-17 21:10 ` Jann Horn
2020-02-17 21:57 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=F773CB3F-992B-4BC9-9376-72300BBA550B@vmware.com \
--to=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=ecree@solarflare.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=jeyu@kernel.org \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=julia@ni.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).