[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160408174628.GN24661@htj.duckdns.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:46:28 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@....com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@....com>,
Toshimitsu Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] percpu_stats: Enable 64-bit counts in 32-bit
architectures
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 01:32:52PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> Yes, I think it will be more efficient to use percpu_counter in this case.
> The preempt_disable/enable() calls are pretty cheap. Once in a while, you
> need to take the lock and update the global count. How about I change the
> 2nd patch to use percpu_counter internally when 64-bit counts are needed in
> 32-bit archs, but use the regular percpu counts on 64-bit archs? If you are
> OK with that, I can update the patch accordingly.
Does having percpu_stats as a separate construct make sense after
that? Just use percpu_counter directly? You end up wasting a bit
more space that way but most of space overhead for these things are in
percpu part anyway, so in proportion it shouldn't make that much of a
difference.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists