From: Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, hca@linux.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC 0/2] allow to inline generic entry
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 15:38:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230516133810.171487-1-svens@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
Hi,
i looked into the syscall performance on s390 with the latest
kernel. For that reason i wrote a small syscall test program,
which just calls getpid() in a loop:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <bsd/sys/time.h>
#include <unistd.h>
static const double nsec_per_sec = 1000000000;
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
struct timespec start, end, res;
double diff;
int i;
(void)argc;
(void)argv;
clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &start);
for (i = 0; i < 150000000; i++) {
volatile int a = getpid();
(void)a;
}
clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &end);
timespecsub(&end, &start, &res);
diff = ((double)res.tv_sec * nsec_per_sec + (double)res.tv_nsec) / nsec_per_sec;
printf("%f\n", diff);
return 0;
}
Analyzing performance data i see some overhead in the generic entry C
functions, which are not inlined because they are defined in
kernel/entry/common.c. Moving them to include/linux/entry-common.h
gives me the following runtime for the loop above:
with entry common code inlined: 12.8s
not inlined: 13.8s
While i prefer to have C functions in C files instead of header files,
7% performance gain is quite a lot, so i wonder what people think about
moving them to header files. I made this a small patchset for reference,
if there is interest in merging that i'll clean it up and submit it.
Any thoughts?
Sven Schnelle (2):
entry: move the exit path to header files
entry: move the enter path to header files
include/linux/entry-common.h | 305 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
kernel/entry/common.c | 281 --------------------------------
2 files changed, 297 insertions(+), 289 deletions(-)
--
2.39.2
next reply other threads:[~2023-05-16 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-16 13:38 Sven Schnelle [this message]
2023-05-16 13:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] entry: move the exit path to header files Sven Schnelle
2023-05-16 16:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-05-16 20:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2023-05-17 5:45 ` Sven Schnelle
2023-05-16 13:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] entry: move the enter " Sven Schnelle
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=20230516133810.171487-1-svens@linux.ibm.com \
--to=svens@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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