[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080819093130.GF28713@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:31:30 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 9] x86/smp function calls: convert x86 tlb flushes
to use function calls [POST 2]
* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > nice stuff!
> >
> > I suspect the extra cost might be worth it for two reasons: 1) we could
> > optimize the cross-call implementation further
>
> Unfortunately, I think the kmalloc fix for the RCU issue is going to
> hurt quite a lot.
yeah :-(
Nick, is there any way to get rid of that kmalloc() in the async
function call case? The whole premise of the smp_function_call() rewrite
was that it's faster - and now it's measurably slower.
At least we could/should perhaps standardize/generalize all the
'specific' IPI handlers into the smp_function_call() framework: if
function address equals to a pre-cooked IPI entry point we could call
that function without a kmalloc. As these are all hardwired,
__builtin_is_constant_p() could come to the help as well. Hm?
Ingo
--
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