Re: [RFC PATCH v2 -tip 0/4] x86: signal handler improvement

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 - 11:33 am

Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote:

Yes, it should be able to process this in a register, instead of storing 
to the stack and then merging later.

It's possible it's trying to do that to hide latency, but that's clearly 
a lose in this case.

I'd hate to obfuscate the code, and I'd *really* hate to obfuscate the 
code to work around gcc brokenness, and then not even bothering to tell 
the gcc folks.

	-hpa
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC PATCH v2 -tip 0/4] x86: signal handler improvement, Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 11:08 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH v2 -tip 0/4] x86: signal handler improvement, H. Peter Anvin, (Thu Sep 25, 11:14 am)
[RFC PATCH v2 -tip 1/4] x86: uaccess: rename __put_user_u6 ..., Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 11:18 am)
[RFC PATCH v2 -tip 2/4] x86: uaccess: introduce __{put|get ..., Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 11:18 am)
[RFC PATCH v2 -tip 3/4] x86: uaccess: introduce __{put|get ..., Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 11:18 am)
[RFC PATCH v2 -tip 4/4] x86: signal: use __{put|get}_user_cerr, Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 11:18 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH v2 -tip 0/4] x86: signal handler improvement, Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 11:29 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH v2 -tip 0/4] x86: signal handler improvement, H. Peter Anvin, (Thu Sep 25, 11:33 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH v2 -tip 0/4] x86: signal handler improvement, Hiroshi Shimamoto, (Thu Sep 25, 12:38 pm)