On Wed, 29 Sept 2021 at 13:25, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Then use the already existing (right ;P) inlining to do the following: > > > > if (md->ptr + args->off != ret_ptr) > > __pointer_flush(...) > > The inlining is orthogonal, though, right? The helper can do this check > whether or not it's a proper CALL or not (although obviously for > performance reasons we do want it to inline, at least eventually). In > particular, I believe we can make progress on this patch series without > working out the inlining :) Yes, I was just worried that your answer would be "it's too expensive" ;) > > This means that __pointer_flush has to deal with aliased memory > > though, so it would always have to memmove. Probably OK for the "slow" > > path? > > Erm, not sure what you mean here? Yeah, flushing is going to take longer > if you ended up using the stack pointer instead of writing directly to > the packet. That's kinda intrinsic? Or am I misunderstanding you? I think I misunderstood your comment about memcpy to mean "want to avoid aliased memory for perf reasons". Never mind! -- Lorenz Bauer | Systems Engineer 6th Floor, County Hall/The Riverside Building, SE1 7PB, UK www.cloudflare.com
