From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 15:17:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305670666.2915.128.camel@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DD2EBAB.5080004@gmail.com>
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:42 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 05/17/2011 10:47 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> > +static noinline_for_stack
>
> I still fail to see why this should be slowed down by noinlining it.
> Care to explain?
Just that I was hesitant to change it without consensus and it follows
the convention of other similarly called functions.
> With my setup, the code below inlined will use 32 bytes of stack. The
> same as %pK case. Uninlined it obviously eats "only" 8 bytes for IP.
Maybe could we defer that discussion into a following patch, which maybe
does a similar analysis on the other noinline_for_stack usage in that
case?
(And I may be dropping the whole series here in a bit, so more debate on
it might be moot)
thanks
-john
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 15:17:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305670666.2915.128.camel@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DD2EBAB.5080004@gmail.com>
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:42 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 05/17/2011 10:47 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> > +static noinline_for_stack
>
> I still fail to see why this should be slowed down by noinlining it.
> Care to explain?
Just that I was hesitant to change it without consensus and it follows
the convention of other similarly called functions.
> With my setup, the code below inlined will use 32 bytes of stack. The
> same as %pK case. Uninlined it obviously eats "only" 8 bytes for IP.
Maybe could we defer that discussion into a following patch, which maybe
does a similar analysis on the other noinline_for_stack usage in that
case?
(And I may be dropping the whole series here in a bit, so more debate on
it might be moot)
thanks
-john
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-17 22:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-17 20:47 [PATCH 0/3] v5 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` [PATCH 1/3] comm: Introduce comm_lock spinlock to protect task->comm access John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 21:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-17 21:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-17 21:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-17 21:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-17 22:56 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 22:56 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-18 0:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 0:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-17 22:27 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 22:27 ` John Stultz
2011-05-18 1:02 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 1:02 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-17 20:47 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 21:42 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 21:42 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 21:52 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 21:52 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:04 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 22:04 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 22:17 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:17 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:17 ` John Stultz [this message]
2011-05-17 22:17 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` [PATCH 3/3] checkpatch.pl: Add check for task comm references John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:58 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 20:58 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 21:04 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2011-05-17 21:04 ` Michal Nazarewicz
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-05-16 21:19 [PATCH 0/3] v4 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19 ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:54 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-16 21:54 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-16 23:10 ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 23:10 ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 23:56 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-16 23:56 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 0:11 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 0:11 ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 7:21 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 7:21 ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-18 0:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 0:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-12 23:02 [PATCH 0/3] v3 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-12 23:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-12 23:02 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:23 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] v2 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:23 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 0:51 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-11 0:51 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-11 1:10 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 1:10 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 1:16 ` john stultz
2011-05-11 1:16 ` john stultz
2011-05-11 1:20 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-11 1:20 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-12 22:12 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:12 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:29 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-12 22:29 ` Joe Perches
2011-05-13 21:56 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-13 21:56 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-11 9:33 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-11 9:33 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-11 21:02 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 21:02 ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 10:43 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:43 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:45 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:45 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 18:01 ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 18:01 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 17:36 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-11 17:36 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-11 21:04 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 21:04 ` John Stultz
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=1305670666.2915.128.camel@work-vm \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mina86@mina86.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.