Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 16:26:47 -0700 From: Scott Long <scott4long@yahoo.com> To: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Scott Long <scottl@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r274489 - in head/sys/amd64: amd64 include Message-ID: <13EC3116-6146-42FC-8941-2C7C009224B3@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <35E5EAD8-99C1-43C0-8D01-B3B5B86ECA25@me.com> References: <201411132211.sADMBjP3009246@svn.freebsd.org> <35E5EAD8-99C1-43C0-8D01-B3B5B86ECA25@me.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Nov 20, 2014, at 11:33 PM, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com> wrote: >=20 > On Nov 13, 2014, at 14:11, Scott Long <scottl@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>=20 >> Author: scottl >> Date: Thu Nov 13 22:11:44 2014 >> New Revision: 274489 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274489 >>=20 >> Log: >> Extend earlier addition of stack frames to most of support.S. This = makes >> stack traces in KDB, HWPMC, and DTrace much more reliable and useful. >=20 > No performance differences? The kernel enables/disables the compiler = option to omit the frame pointer based on the kernel config file. If = DDB, DTrace, or HWPMC is enabled, the frame pointer is always saved in C = functions.=20 >=20 > Some of these functions are in the hot path, so if you didn't see any = performance problem, I wonder if we should disable -fomit-frame-pointer = always. That=E2=80=99s a good question to look further into. I didn=E2=80=99t = see any measurable differences with this change. I think that the cost = of the function call itself masks the cost of a few extra instructions, = but I didn=E2=80=99t test with switching it on/off for the entire = kernel. That said, I purposely implemented this as macros so it could = be easily changed in the future. If someone finds that this measurably = impacts a certain workload, I wouldn=E2=80=99t object to making it = conditional, though it does complicate any hand-written ASM code that = tries to access the stack via %esp offsets. We don=E2=80=99t have = anything like that now, but Kip was concerned enough about it in the = future that I left it enabled unconditionally. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13EC3116-6146-42FC-8941-2C7C009224B3>