On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 06:24:16AM +0000, Biju Das wrote: > Just a question, how does function pointer makes a performance difference compared to > ALTERNATIVE_X() macros? > > On both cases, we are pushing function parameters to stack, jumping to the actual routine > And then on return pop the variables from stack. Am I missing something here? Indirect calls have always been more expensive, and with the hard- and software mitigations for spectre-like attacks they are becoming even more expensive. But other other point is adding more cache flushing variants should not be easy. Everyone should be using the standardize version. If it's not implemented in hardware despite having ratified extensions you can fake it up in SBI. Yes, that's way more expensive than indirect calls, but that's what you get for taping out new hardware that ignores the actual architecture specification and just does their own made up shit.
