Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>   
> > > Which means that my idea of using the technique we use on x86_32 will not
> > >       
> > work.
> >
> > No, the compiler memory model we use guarantees that everything will be within
> > 2G of each other.  The linker will spew loudly if that's not the case.
> >     
>
> The per cpu area is at least theoretically dynamically allocated.  And we
> really want to put it in cpu local memory.    Which means on any reasonable
> NUMA machine the per cpu areas should be all over the box.
>   

Yes, but that doesn't matter in the slightest.  The effective address 
will be within 2G of the base; the base can be anywhere.

> So there is no guarantee that with an arbitrary 64bit address in %gs of anything.
>
> Grr.  Except you are correct.  We have to guarantee that the offsets we have
> chosen at compile time still work.  And we know all of the compile time offsets
> will be in the -2G range.  So they are all 32bit numbers.  Negative 32bit
> numbers to be sure.  That trivially leaves us with everything working except
> the nasty hard coded decimal 40.
>   

Right.

   J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/