|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: Performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native identified
Xin, Xiaohui wrote:
> Remember we have done one experiment with "jump", the result shows seems the
> overhead is even more than the call.
I didn't, no. That seems extremely weird to me.
(Unbalancing the call/ret stack is known to suck royally, of course.)
>>>
>>>
>> Can't those calls be changed to jumps?
>>
>
> In this specific instance of this example, yes. But if you start
> enabling various spinlock debug options then there'll be code following
> the call. It would be hard for the runtime patching machinery to know
> when it would be safe to do the substitution.
>
When there is code after the call, it's rather obviously not safe.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |