lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 0/5] x86: two-phase syscall tracing and seccomp fastpath
Andy, to avoid the confusion: I am not trying to review this changes.
As you probably know my understanding of asm code in entry.S is very
limited.

Just a couple of questions to ensure I understand this correctly.

On 07/28, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> This is both a cleanup and a speedup. It reduces overhead due to
> installing a trivial seccomp filter by 87%. The speedup comes from
> avoiding the full syscall tracing mechanism for filters that don't
> return SECCOMP_RET_TRACE.

And only after I look at 5/5 I _seem_ to actually understand where
this speedup comes from.

So. Currently tracesys: path always lead to "iret" after syscall, with
this change we can avoid it if phase_1() returns zero, correct?

And, this also removes the special TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT-only case in entry.S,
cool.

I am wondering if we can do something similar with do_notify_resume() ?


Stupid question. To simplify, lets forget that syscall_trace_enter()
already returns the value. Can't we simplify the asm code if we do
not export 2 functions, but make syscall_trace_enter() return
"bool slow_path_is_needed". So that "tracesys:" could do

// pseudo code

tracesys:
SAVE_REST
FIXUP_TOP_OF_STACK

call syscall_trace_enter

if (!slow_path_is_needed) {
addq REST_SKIP, %rsp
jmp system_call_fastpath
}

...

?

Once again, I am just curious, it is not that I actually suggest to consider
this option.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-29 22:21    [W:0.125 / U:2.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site