Re: [PATCH 00/33] Compile-time stack metadata validation

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 12:32:06PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

What I actually see in the listing is:

 	decl	__percpu_prefix:__preempt_count
 	je	1f:
	....
 1:
 	call	___preempt_schedule

So it puts the "call ___preempt_schedule" in the slow path.

Ah yes indeed. Same difference though.

I also don't see how that would be related to the use of the asm
statement in the __preempt_schedule() macro.  Doesn't the use of
unlikely() in preempt_enable() put the call in the slow path?

Sadly no, unlikely() and asm_goto don't work well together. But the slow
path or not isn't the reason we do the asm call thing.

  #define preempt_enable() \
  do { \
	  barrier(); \
	  if (unlikely(preempt_count_dec_and_test())) \
		  preempt_schedule(); \
  } while (0)

Also, why is the thunk needed?  Any reason why preempt_enable() can't be
called directly from C?

That would make the call-site save registers and increase the size of
every preempt_enable(). By using the thunk we can do callee saved
registers and avoid blowing up the call site.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html