From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: "Fr馘駻ic Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, X86 <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Subject: context tracking vs. syscall_trace_leave & do_notify_resume loop
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 21:30:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5542D730.2050903@redhat.com> (raw)
Andy pointed out to me something I should have seen earlier: both
syscall_trace_leave and do_notify_resume call both user_exit()
and user_enter(), which has the potential to greatly increase the
cost of context tracking.
I believe (though it is hard to know for sure) there are legitimate
reasons why there is a loop around syscall_trace_leave and
do_notify_resume, but I strongly suspect the context tracking code
does not need to be in that loop.
I suspect it would be possible to stick a call to a new function
(return_to_user ?) right after the DISABLE_INTERRUPTS below, which
could be used to do the context tracking user_enter just once, and
later on also to load the user FPU context (patches I have sitting
around).
syscall_return:
/* The IRETQ could re-enable interrupts: */
DISABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_ANY)
TRACE_IRQS_IRETQ
Andy, Denys, do you guys see any issues with that idea?
I realize that would mean a RESTORE_EXTRA_REGS after that call
to return_to_user(), but it looks like that could be achieved
without making the code any worse than it already is :)
--
All rights reversed
next reply other threads:[~2015-05-01 1:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-01 1:30 Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-05-01 15:55 ` context tracking vs. syscall_trace_leave & do_notify_resume loop Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01 16:00 ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:05 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01 16:14 ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:16 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01 16:19 ` Rik van Riel
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=5542D730.2050903@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=dvlasenk@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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