[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901271506580.3114@qirst.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:08:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hpa@...or.com, brgerst@...il.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, travis@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, steiner@....com, hugh@...itas.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu: add optimized generic percpu accessors
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > later). That's because they use TLB tricks for a static 64k per-cpu
> > area, but this doesn't scale. That might not be vital: abandoning
> > that trick will mean they can't optimise read_percpu/read_percpu_var
> > etc as much.
Why wont it scale? this is a separate TLB entry for each processor.
>
> Isn't something like the following possible?
>
> #define pcpu_read(ptr) \
> ({ \
> if (__builtin_constant_p(ptr) && \
> ptr >= PCPU_STATIC_START && ptr < PCPU_STATIC_END) \
> do 64k TLB trick for static pcpu; \
> else \
> do generic stuff; \
> })
The TLB trick is just to access the percpu data at a fixed base. I.e.
value = SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(percpu_var, FIXED_ADDRESS);
--
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