From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] x86: Patchable constants
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 09:01:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxJO7kDNp6wRnU58Z6-sPbK1SqdzpgLBTAe54mdPjnd=g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180207145913.2703-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> This patchset introduces concept of patchable constants: constant values
> that can be adjusted at boot-time in response to system configuration or
> user input (kernel command-line).
>
> Patchable constants can replace variables that never changes at runtime
> (only at boot-time), but used in very hot path.
So I actually wanted something very close to this, but I think your
approach is much too simplistic.
You force all constants into a register, which means that the
resulting code is always going to be very far from non-optimal.
You also force a big "movabsq" instruction, which really is huge, and
almost never needed. Together with the "use a register", it just makes
for big code.
What I wanted was something that can take things like a shift by a
variable that is set once, and turn it into a shift by a boot-time
constant. Which means that you literally end up patching the 8-bit
immediate in the shift instruction itself.
In particular, was looking at the dcache hashing code, and (to quote
an old email of mine), what I wanted was to simplify the run-time
constant part of this:
│ mov $0x20,%ecx
│ sub 0xaf8bd5(%rip),%ecx # ffffffff81d34600 <d_hash_shift>
│ mov 0x8(%rsi),%r9
│ add %r14d,%eax
│ imul $0x9e370001,%eax,%eax
│ shr %cl,%eax
and it was the expression "32-d_hash_shift" that is really a constant,
and that sequence of
│ mov $0x20,%ecx
│ sub 0xaf8bd5(%rip),%ecx # ffffffff81d34600 <d_hash_shift>
│ shr %cl,%eax
should be just a single
│ shr $CONSTANT,%eax
at runtime.
Look - much smaller code, and register %rcx isn't used at all. And no
D$ miss on loading that constant (that is a constant depending on
boot-time setup only).
It's rather more complex, but it actually gives a much bigger win. The
code itself will be much better, and smaller.
The *infrastructure* for the code gets pretty hairy, though.
The good news is that the patch already existed to at least _some_
degree. Peter Anvin did it about 18 months ago.
It was not really pursued all the way because it *is* a lot of extra
complexity, and I think there was some other hold-up, but he did have
skeleton code for the actual replacement.
There was a thread on the x86 arch list with the subject line
Disgusting pseudo-self-modifying code idea: "variable constants"
but I'm unable to actually find the patch. I know there was at least a
vert early prototype.
Adding hpa to the cc in the hope that he has some prototype code still
laying around..
Linus
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-07 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-07 14:59 Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-02-07 14:59 ` [RFC 1/3] x86: Introduce patchable constants Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-02-07 14:59 ` [RFC 2/3] x86/mm/encrypt: Convert __PHYSICAL_MASK to patchable constant Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-02-07 14:59 ` [RFC 3/3] x86/mm/encrypt: Convert sme_me_mask " Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-02-07 16:25 ` [RFC 0/3] x86: Patchable constants Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-07 17:12 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-02-07 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2018-02-07 17:13 ` hpa
2018-02-07 20:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-02-07 20:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
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='CA+55aFxJO7kDNp6wRnU58Z6-sPbK1SqdzpgLBTAe54mdPjnd=g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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