linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Zhi-zhou <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:32:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160219103205.GD27062@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN1e=SF4iAVZzvs=+rJxmUX_z7KNSwegxWaor3gDfXD-=MAQ4Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:30:09AM +0800, Zhi-zhou wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Catalin Marinas
> <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 07:48:35PM +0800, Zhi-zhou Zhang wrote:
> > > From: zhizhou <zhizhou.zh@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > This patch is based on the implementation of arm. The generic
> > > current_pt_regs is implemented with current->stack. It need to access
> > > memory that would be too expensive.
> >
> > Do you have any performance numbers?
> 
> I'm using QEMU, so no. Actually this macro isn't heavily used. I just
> think using the generic
> implementation is not very nice. It get task_struct from sp_el0, then
> get stack(which is
> equal to sp_el0) from task_struct. There are two unnecessary memory accesses.

I'd much rather use the generic implementation unless there's a compelling
reason not to. "I think it's not very nice" doesn't really cut it for me!

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-19 10:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-18 11:48 [PATCH] arm64: add architecture specified current_pt_regs Zhi-zhou Zhang
2016-02-18 11:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-02-19  2:30   ` Zhi-zhou
2016-02-19 10:32     ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-02-19 12:01       ` Zhizhou Zhang

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=20160219103205.GD27062@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=zhizhou.zh@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).