Re: [PATCH net-next] tls: Add opt-in zerocopy mode of sendfile()
From: Maxim Mikityanskiy <hidden>
Date: 2022-05-05 12:40:54
On 2022-05-04 12:49, David Laight wrote:
quoted
quoted
If you declare the union on the stack in the callers, and pass by value - is the compiler not going to be clever enough to still DDRT?Ah, OK, it should do the thing. I thought you wanted me to ditch the union altogether.Some architectures always pass struct/union by address. Which is probably not what you had in mind.
Do you have any specific architecture in mind? I couldn't find any information that it happens anywhere, x86_64 ABI [1] (pages 20-21) aligns with my expectations, and my common sense can't explain why would some architectures do what you say. In C, when the caller passes a struct as a parameter, the callee can freely modify it. If the compiler silently replaced it with a pointer, the callee would corrupt the caller's local variable, so such approach requires the caller to make an extra copy. Making an extra copy on the stack and passing a pointer doesn't make any sense to me if you can just make a copy on the stack (or to a register) and call it a parameter. If you know any specific architecture supported by Linux that passes all unions by a pointer, could you please point me to it? Maybe I'm missing something in my logic, and a real-world example will explain things, but at the moment it sounds unrealistic to me. Thanks, Max [1]: https://www.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/mpx-linux64-abi.pdf
David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)