This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v2] Add x86 32 bit vDSO time function support


On 09-10-2014 17:50, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> On 10/09/2014 01:31 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>> +static long int
>> +clock_gettime_syscall (clockid_t id, struct timespec *tp)
>> +{
>> +  INTERNAL_SYSCALL_DECL (err);
>> +  return INTERNAL_SYSCALL (clock_gettime, err, 2, id, tp);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void
>> +__vdso_platform_setup (void)
>> +{
>> +  PREPARE_VERSION (linux26, "LINUX_2.6", 61765110);
> Perhaps:
>
>      PREPARE_VERSION_KNOWN (linux26, LINUX_2_6);
>
> (here and several other places)

Thanks, I fixed it on all the places nows.

>
>> +#ifdef SHARED
>> +# define SYSCALL_GETTIME(id, tp) \
>> +  ({ long int (*f) (clockid_t, struct timespec *) = __vdso_clock_gettime; \
>> +  long int v_ret;							  \
>> +  PTR_DEMANGLE (f);							  \
>> +  v_ret = (*f) (id, tp);						  \
>> +  if (INTERNAL_SYSCALL_ERROR_P (v_ret, )) {				  \
>> +    __set_errno (INTERNAL_SYSCALL_ERRNO (v_ret, ));			  \
>> +    v_ret = -1;								  \
>> +  }									  \
>> +  v_ret; })
> Does introducing the dispatch through function pointer here cause a
> measurable performance regression on i386 kernels which lack the VDSO?
> If so, is that a concern?
>
> When I've tried this approach on ARM, it appears to do so (around 5%
> slowdown).

Using a simple benchmark (in attachments) the difference in such scenarios is not
as drastic as ARM it seems:

kernel: Linux birita 3.13.0-39
CPU:    Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU          6600  @ 2.40GHz

EGLIBC 2.19-0ubuntu6.3: 1415.12 cycles
GLIBC 2.20 master:      1421.66 cycles

>
>
>> +# define INTERNAL_GETTIME(id, tp) \
>> +  ({ long int (*f) (clockid_t, struct timespec *) = __vdso_clock_gettime; \
>> +  PTR_DEMANGLE (f);							  \
>> +  (*f) (id, tp); })
>> +#endif
> I'm probably missing something, but I am failing to see the need for an
> INTERNAL_GETTIME definition in
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86/clock_gettime.c.  I know this patch is
> merely moving existing code, but sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/clock_gettime.c
> does not use INTERNAL_GETTIME, and neither does
> sysdeps/unix/clock_gettime.c.
>
> INTERNAL_GETTIME is needed for timespec_get, but I am not seeing the
> need to duplicate it for clock_gettime.

i386 does not define HAVE_CLOCK_GETTIME_VSYSCALL and thus:

sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/clock_gettime.c:

 26: # define INTERNAL_VSYSCALL INTERNAL_SYSCALL

and then if INTERNAL_GETTIME is not defined, it will as:

 37 #ifndef INTERNAL_GETTIME
 38 # define INTERNAL_GETTIME(id, tp) \
 39   INTERNAL_VSYSCALL (clock_gettime, err, 2, id, tp)
 40 #endif

And without proper set the PTR_DEMANGLE is not called either.

With PREPARE_VERSION_KNOWN fixes, is it ok to commit?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]