From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Use asm_inline() instead of asm() in amd_clear_divider()
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 11:15:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z9QB0nP6Mb3ri3mj@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B7AB40CF-165D-448C-963C-787D74BB9042@alien8.de>
* Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> Sorry but this doesn't justify this churn. There's nothing
> quantifyingly palpable here to warrant this.
I disagree, asm() is a known-bad inlining interface for fundamentally
single-instruction inlines like this one, and there's various
performance benefits to cleaning this up, as evidenced by the benchmark
numbers and analysis in this pending commit:
9628d19e91f1 ("x86/locking/atomic: Improve performance by using asm_inline() for atomic locking instructions")
asm_inline() was implemented by the GCC folks *at our request* to fix
such issues.
So these efforts are not "churn", at all - on the contrary.
Not merging such fixes/annotations would be similar to keeping build
warnings about unclean code because they don't cause problems right
now. While most build warnings are benign with no runtime effect, most
of the time they point out an underlying problem.
We also asked Uros to submit careful, finegrained patches that might
bloat the kernel, and this patch is the result of that request.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-14 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-13 19:18 [PATCH] x86/asm: Use asm_inline() instead of asm() in amd_clear_divider() Uros Bizjak
2025-03-13 19:26 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-13 19:50 ` Uros Bizjak
2025-03-13 20:07 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-13 20:11 ` Uros Bizjak
2025-03-14 10:15 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2025-03-14 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-14 13:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-16 0:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-16 10:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-14 11:03 ` Uros Bizjak
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=Z9QB0nP6Mb3ri3mj@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.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.