linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/12]: sparc64: Use new dynamic per-cpu allocator.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 09 Apr 2009 04:48:12 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12]: sparc64: Use new dynamic per-cpu allocator.

Hello,

The percpu part looks good to me.  Just one question below.

David Miller wrote:
>  void __init setup_per_cpu_areas(void)
>  {
> -	unsigned long size, i, nr_possible_cpus = num_possible_cpus();
> -	char *ptr;
> +	size_t dyn_size, static_size = __per_cpu_end - __per_cpu_start;
> +	static struct vm_struct vm;
> +	unsigned long delta, cpu;
> +	size_t pcpu_unit_size;
> +	size_t ptrs_size;
> +
> +	pcpur_size = PFN_ALIGN(static_size + PERCPU_MODULE_RESERVE +
> +			       PERCPU_DYNAMIC_RESERVE);
> +	dyn_size = pcpur_size - static_size - PERCPU_MODULE_RESERVE;

Isn't it better to use embedding allocator for !NUMA cases (one less
TLB entry usage for each CPU)?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/