From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Duplication of vdso and vsyscall code?
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:47:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AD011E0.8010402@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091010041442.GF1656@one.firstfloor.org>
On 10/09/09 21:14, Andi Kleen wrote:
> One is at a fixed position in the user address space, and the other at a
> randomized position. The fixed one came first. Fixed doesn't know
> where randomized is. Randomized is also compiled and linked completely
> differently.
Is the fixed vsyscall stuff now considered to be legacy? As far as I
can see, the vdso seems to be what ends up being used on all the systems
I've tried (going back to Fedora 8).
> In theory the randomized one could call the fixed one, but
> originally there were some thoughts about turning off fixed for some
> applications that don't need it and also the path was considered very
> performance critical, so unneeded jumps were avoided.
>
rdtsc seems to swamp pretty much everything else. In my measurements it
alone takes 1/3 of the time. Though that's Core2; AMD have
traditionally been much better at those kinds of things.
> In theory you could probably #include the code from a common file, but it
> wouldn't buy you too much.
Yes, that's what I had in mind. I don't think duplicating the
instructions is all that important, but having two separate similarish
pieces of code seems like a maintenance headache. I only discovered the
second set of code by accident; I'd assumed that once I'd found one
vgettimeofday I'd found them all (and I'd been assuming that
clock_gettime didn't get the same treatment).
I'll see what happens if I try unifying them...
J
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-10 4:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-09 21:15 Duplication of vdso and vsyscall code? Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-10-10 4:14 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-10 4:47 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
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=4AD011E0.8010402@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--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 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.