Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86, vdso32: handle 32 bit vDSO larger one page

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:21 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 03/13/2014 11:08 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 03/13/2014 10:28 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> Does this mean you prefer the relocation approach to the compat vdso
>>> removal approach?  It seems like Linus is okay with either one.
>>>
>>
>> Actually, thinking about it, removing it is probably better:
>>
>> a) gets rid of legacy code, making room for unification;
>> b) either way enabling compat support (either relocation or disabling
>>    the vdso) has a performance penalty for *all* processes.
>>
>> The only way to avoid that is to have a vdso at a fixed addresses across
>> all processes, either in the fixmap or in the user area (presumably at
>> the very top.)
>>
>
> So going back and re-reading all the threads, the consensus was to
> remove the compat vdso, but recycling the CONFIG_COMPAT_VDSO
> configuration option name for the default-disable option.
>

I don't recall anyone suggesting keeping the name.  CONFIG_COMPAT_VDSO
will henceforth be a silly name, since the "compat" mode won't have a
vdso.

The consensus was that the default should be no vdso, right?  My most
recent patchset calls it CONFIG_ENABLE_VDSO32_BY_DEFAULT and defaults
to n.

--Andy

> It is important that anyone who actually cares about performance unsets
> the option.

Should there be a warning at startup if the option is set?

--Andy
--
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/