From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S964785AbbEMKng (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 13 May 2015 06:43:36 -0400
Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:44620 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751459AbbEMKne (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 13 May 2015 06:43:34 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 12:43:30 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Drop some asm from copy_user_64.S
Message-ID: <20150513104330.GG1517@pd.tnic>
References: <20150512205750.GJ3497@pd.tnic>
 <CA+55aFwZ4xTtvT8JX_T8RVVJD88L2hrE3HK0o-tt8BK=7T_4Aw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150512215320.GK3497@pd.tnic>
 <20150513095248.GD1517@pd.tnic>
 <20150513103140.GA5113@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150513103140.GA5113@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:31:40PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So why should an alternatives-CALL, inlined directly into call sites,
> cost more kernel space?

Not the alternatives CALL alone but inlining _copy_*_user with all the
preparation glue around it would. Basically what we're doing currently.

See how uninlining copy_user_generic() dropped text size from 12375798 to
12269658.

But let me do some more staring...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--