From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc] x86: optimise page fault path a little
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:50:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081113075022.GC2946@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081113074109.GB1723@elte.hu>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 08:41:09AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was just looking around the page fault code for any obvious
> > performance improvements. I noticed do_page_fault is rather big,
> > uses a lot of stack, and generates some branch mispredicts.
> >
> > It's only about 1.1% on the profile of the workload I'm looking at,
> > so my improvement is pretty close to in the noise, but I wonder if
> > micro optimisations like the following would be welcome?
>
> it's definitely welcome!
>
> > This patch adds branch hints and moves error condition code out of
> > line. It shrinks do_page_fault from 2410 bytes to 603 bytes, and
> > from 352 to 64 bytes of stack. Total text size does grow by about
> > 500 bytes due to the additional functions added.
>
> Some small cleanliness nits:
>
> > +/* TODO: match order of arguments */
>
> please fix TODO ;)
OK, I actually already fixed it but forgot to remove that. Basically just
checking whether keeping regs,error_code,address always passed in the
same order reduces code size (there were one or two places already that
did different order for no good reason). Not surprisingly, it saved a
few bytes.
> > +static noinline void no_context(struct pt_regs *regs,
> > + unsigned long error_code, unsigned long address)
> > +{
> > + struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > +#endif
>
> we should just do this unconditionally on 32-bit too.
>
> > + /*
> > + * Oops. The kernel tried to access some bad page. We'll have to
> > + * terminate things with extreme prejudice.
> > + */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > + bust_spinlocks(1);
> > +#else
> > + flags = oops_begin();
> > +#endif
>
> 32-bit should use oops_begin() too. Solves the previous comment as
> well.
>
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > + die("Oops", regs, error_code);
> > + bust_spinlocks(0);
> > + do_exit(SIGKILL);
> > +#else
> > + if (__die("Oops", regs, error_code))
> > + regs = NULL;
> > + /* Executive summary in case the body of the oops scrolled away */
> > + printk(KERN_EMERG "CR2: %016lx\n", address);
> > + oops_end(flags, regs, SIGKILL);
> > +#endif
>
> this difference seems unnecessary too - 32-bit should use oops_end()
> too.
Probably all 3 good comments, but I didn't want to be tempted into changing
behaviour (modulo adding bugs). Easy to merge them up in a subsequent patch,
however...
> > +/* TODO: fixup for oom handling */
>
> please fix todo ;-)
Oh... actually it's OK (we don't loop back again, but that's OK, the init
task will just retry the fault). The comment was actually just in relation
to my oom-killer page fault patches that are in -mm. I'm not proposing
this for merge just yet, but will wait for Andrew.
> this flow could be cleaned up further:
>
> [...]
> > + bad_area(regs, error_code, address);
> > + return;
> [...]
> > + bad_area(regs, error_code, address);
> > + return;
> [...]
> > + bad_area(regs, error_code, address);
> > + return;
> [...]
> > + bad_area(regs, error_code, address);
> > + return;
>
> Any reason why that pattern shouldnt be changed to an appropriate goto
> bad_area? (probably the same goes for the nosemaphore error paths too)
No... not really any reason. gcc effectively turns the code into a goto
anyway. Some days I can't make up my mind which one is better :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-13 7:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-13 7:28 Nick Piggin
2008-11-13 7:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13 7:50 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2008-11-13 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-14 1:22 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-13 16:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-14 1:16 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-13 8:35 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-13 16:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-14 1:58 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-14 2:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-14 2:43 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-14 3:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-14 3:30 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-14 4:44 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20081113075022.GC2946@wotan.suse.de \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®