From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] x86/nmi: Optimize the check for being in the repeat_nmi code
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 17:42:05 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170309224447.678652367@goodmis.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20170309224204.066497548@goodmis.org
[-- Attachment #1: 0001-x86-nmi-Optimize-the-check-for-being-in-the-repeat_n.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1202 bytes --]
From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Linus mentioned that doing two compares can be replaced by a single
compare. That is, instead of:
movq $repeat_nmi, %rdx
cmpq 8(%rsp), %rdx
ja not_in_region
movq $end_repeat_nmi, %rdx
cmpq 8(%rsp), %rdx
ja in_region
we can replace that with:
movq 8(%rsp), %rdx
subq $repeat_nmi, %rdx
cmpq $end_repeat_nmi-repeat_nmi, %rdx
jb in_region
Inspired-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S | 11 ++++-------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
index 044d18ebc43c..3aad759aace2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
@@ -1330,13 +1330,10 @@ ENTRY(nmi)
* resume the outer NMI.
*/
- movq $repeat_nmi, %rdx
- cmpq 8(%rsp), %rdx
- ja 1f
- movq $end_repeat_nmi, %rdx
- cmpq 8(%rsp), %rdx
- ja nested_nmi_out
-1:
+ movq 8(%rsp), %rdx
+ subq $repeat_nmi, %rdx
+ cmpq $end_repeat_nmi-repeat_nmi, %rdx
+ jb nested_nmi_out
/*
* Now check "NMI executing". If it's set, then we're nested.
--
2.10.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-09 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-09 22:42 [PATCH 0/2] x86/nmi: Optimize address compares with better jump algorithm Steven Rostedt
2017-03-09 22:42 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2017-03-10 2:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/nmi: Optimize the check for being in the repeat_nmi code Andy Lutomirski
2017-03-10 3:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-10 3:50 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-03-10 7:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-10 19:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-03-10 19:03 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-03-09 22:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/nmi: Fix and optimize the NMI stack check code Steven Rostedt
2017-03-10 2:43 ` Andy Lutomirski
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=20170309224447.678652367@goodmis.org \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox