Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86-64: allow using RIP-relative addressing for per-CPU data

[Jan Beulich]

>>> Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 11/04/14 8:33 PM >>>
>On 11/04/2014 12:49 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Observing that per-CPU data (in the SMP case) is reachable by
>> exploiting 64-bit address wraparound, these two patches
>> arrange for using the one byte shorter RIP-relative addressing
>> forms for the majority of per-CPU accesses.
>> 
>> 1: handle PC-relative relocations on per-CPU data
>> 2: use RIP-relative addressing for most per-CPU accesses
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>> 
>
>I'm lost here.  Can you give an example of a physical and virtual
>address of an instruction, the address within the gs segment, and why
>the relocations are backwards?

When an instruction using RIP relative addressing gets moved up in
address space, the distance to the target address decreases. I.e. it's the
opposite of a normal, non-PC-relative base relocation (where the target
address increases together with the instruction getting moved up).

Jan

--
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/