On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 08:31:22PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 04:30:56PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 03:04:23PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Fair enough I suppose. I'll slap a changelog and your SoB on it and I
> > > suppose I'll got
On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 04:30:56PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 03:04:23PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Fair enough I suppose. I'll slap a changelog and your SoB on it and I
> > suppose I'll got commit the whole lot. Then we can forget about it
> > again.
>
> FWIW,
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 05:18:37PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> +static struct static_call_tramp_key *tramp_key_lookup(unsigned long addr)
> +{
> + struct static_call_tramp_key *start = __start_static_call_tramp_key;
> + struct static_call_tramp_key *stop = __stop_static_call_tramp_key;
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 03:04:23PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Fair enough I suppose. I'll slap a changelog and your SoB on it and I
> suppose I'll got commit the whole lot. Then we can forget about it
> again.
FWIW, the whole thing looks like this..
---
Subject: static_call: Allow module use
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 05:18:37PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 01:02:18PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 01:00:07PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 07:44:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 01:02:18PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 01:00:07PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 07:44:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:33:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > >
> > > > What did you
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 01:00:07PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 07:44:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:33:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> > > What did you think about .static_call_tramp_key? I could whip up a
> > > patch later
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 07:44:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:33:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > What did you think about .static_call_tramp_key? I could whip up a
> > patch later unless you beat me to it.
>
> Yeah, I'm not sure.. why duplicate information
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:33:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> What did you think about .static_call_tramp_key? I could whip up a
> patch later unless you beat me to it.
Yeah, I'm not sure.. why duplicate information already present in
kallsyms?
There's a fair number of features that
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 05:19:02PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:59:14AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 12:27:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:13:47AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:59:14AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 12:27:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:13:47AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 05:57:30PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> > > > Well, I hate it,
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 12:27:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:13:47AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 05:57:30PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > > Well, I hate it, but I'm not sure I have any better ideas. It should be
> > > possible to
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:13:47AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 05:57:30PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > Well, I hate it, but I'm not sure I have any better ideas. It should be
> > possible to use kallsyms, instead of the rb-tree/register nonsense. Not
> > sure
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 05:57:30PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:52:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > static int static_call_add_module(struct module *mod)
> > {
> > - return __static_call_init(mod, mod->static_call_sites,
> > -
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:52:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> static int static_call_add_module(struct module *mod)
> {
> - return __static_call_init(mod, mod->static_call_sites,
> - mod->static_call_sites +
> mod->num_static_call_sites);
> + struct
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 05:40:39PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:52:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> > > +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule,
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:52:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> > +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule, __preempt_schedule_func());
> > +EXPORT_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule);
> > +#endif
>
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule, __preempt_schedule_func());
> +EXPORT_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule);
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
>
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:57:53PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 17:53, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> > > +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule,
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 17:53, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
> > +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule, __preempt_schedule_func());
> > +EXPORT_STATIC_CALL(preempt_schedule);
> > +#endif
>
> >
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:58:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I'm thinking the above doesn't build for !PREEMPT_DYNAMIC, given it
> relies on the STATIC_CALL unconditionally, but we only define it for
> PREEMPT_DYNAMIC:
Ooh, I see, x86 cannot get there anymore.
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h
> index 69485ca13665..3db9cb8b1a25 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
> #include
From: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)"
Provide static calls to control preempt_schedule[_notrace]()
(called in CONFIG_PREEMPT) so that we can override their behaviour when
preempt= is overriden.
Since the default behaviour is full preemption, both their calls are
initialized to the arch provided
23 matches
Mail list logo
