mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: "Vineet Gupta" <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"arcml" <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	"lkml" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dwarf unwinder question
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 06:15:33 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56531F8502000078000B7D52@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C2D7FE5348E1B147BCA15975FBA23075F44D2DF8@IN01WEMBXA.internal.synopsys.com>

>>> On 23.11.15 at 14:03, <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com> wrote:
> I was wondering if u could answer a question in that respect: 
> arch/arc/kernel/unwind.c
> 
> If the binary search for a PC fails, it resorts to linear search, which for 
> our
> case was taking 3 million cycles (vs. normal ~2000).
> Do you remember why this linear search step was needed - after all the binary
> lookup table is created out of early parsing of the same data.
> 
> The fail scenario is for hand asm symbols lacking gcc generated dwarf info 
> and we
> don't have yet the CFI pseudo ops support in assembler.
> I can fix memset etc to have empty dwarf info, still unwinder needs this 
> fixing.
> 
> In case of perf, an overflow interrupt in hand optimized memset leads into 
> the
> unwinder slow path linear search which causes RCU stalls and such.
> I'm going to remove it but was wondering if u could provide some historic 
> background.

Iirc there was no binary lookup at all originally. When it got added,
it seemed odd to remove the linear lookup altogether (want to keep
it at least for the case where the binary lookup table couldn't be
built for whatever reason), and code structure seemed most
reasonable to simply do one after the other instead of just either.
I'm pretty sure the linear lookup could be skipped if you're sure the
binary lookup table is correct and complete.

Jan


  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-23 13:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-23 13:03 Vineet Gupta
2015-11-23 13:15 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2015-11-23 13:27   ` Vineet Gupta
2015-11-23 13:42     ` Jan Beulich

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=56531F8502000078000B7D52@prv-mh.provo.novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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®