On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 10:36:23AM +0800, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
>
>
> On 2022/11/23 21:28, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am sorry for the late review. I have been snowed under another
> > tasks.
> >
> > On Wed 2022-11-02 16:49:18, Zhen Lei wrote:
> >> Based on the test results of kallsyms_on_each_match_symbol() and
> >> kallsyms_on_each_symbol(), the average performance can be improved by
> >> more than 1500 times.
> >
> > Sounds great.
> >
> >> --- a/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> >> @@ -153,6 +153,24 @@ static int klp_find_callback(void *data, const char *name,
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static int klp_match_callback(void *data, unsigned long addr)
> >> +{
> >> + struct klp_find_arg *args = data;
> >> +
> >> + args->addr = addr;
> >> + args->count++;
> >> +
> >> + /*
> >> + * Finish the search when the symbol is found for the desired position
> >> + * or the position is not defined for a non-unique symbol.
> >> + */
> >> + if ((args->pos && (args->count == args->pos)) ||
> >> + (!args->pos && (args->count > 1)))
> >> + return 1;
> >> +
> >> + return 0;
> >
> > This duplicates most of the klp_find_callback(). Please, call this
> > new function in klp_find_callback() instead of the duplicated code.
> > I mean to do:
> >
> > static int klp_find_callback(void *data, const char *name, unsigned long addr)
> > {
> > struct klp_find_arg *args = data;
> >
> > if (strcmp(args->name, name))
> > return 0;
> >
> > return klp_match_callback(data, addr);
> > }
>
> Good idea. But these patches have been merged into linux-next, how about I post
> a new cleanup patch after v6.2-rc1?
You can send the cleanup now. The code doesn't change drastically, just
base it on modules-next.
Luis
