[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070327144031.ef75dd53.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:40:31 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc: Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm1
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:29:34 +0200
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton a écrit :
> >
> > The wheel spins around, slows then settles on....
> > time-smp-friendly-alignment-of-struct-clocksource.patch!
> >
> > Presumably because the ____cacheline_aligned made vsyscall_gtod_data_t get
> > too big. Or something.
>
> Very strange, since here I have plenty of available room (256 bytes) :
>
> ffffffffff600000 T vgettimeofday
> ffffffffff60004e t vsysc2
> ffffffffff600140 t vread_hpet
> ffffffffff600150 t vread_tsc
> ffffffffff600180 D __vsyscall_gtod_data
> ffffffffff600280 D __vgetcpu_mode
> ffffffffff6002c0 D __jiffies
> <lot of space (256 bytes)>
> ffffffffff600400 T vtime
> ffffffffff600413 t vsysc1
> ffffffffff600800 T vgetcpu
> ffffffffff600c00 T venosys_1
>
> It must depends on the compiler, and/or CONFIG_XXX options...
Badari's config triggered it for me.
> Anyway, I think we can safely move __vgetcpu_mode & __jiffies to the 1024
> bytes area dedicated to vgetcpu() implementation. This saves 128 bytes from
> vsyscall_0 area.
>
> Could we add this patch instead of dropping
> time-smp-friendly-alignment-of-struct-clocksource.patch ?
When you tell me it works OK with Badari's config ;)
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists