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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox