[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090129134224.GH24391@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:42:24 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
npiggin@...e.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use per cpu data for single cpu ipi calls
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 12:13 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > Can generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt() ever see
> > > > CSD_FLAG_ALLOC set now? If not, that kfree can go away.
> > >
> > > Like said above, removing that kmalloc will hurt people.
> >
> > the whole promise of generic-IPI seems to dwindle and we'll get back to
> > roughly where we started out from.
>
> I'd not go that far, the per-cpu csd is a nice fallback, but removing
> that kmalloc is just silly.
>
> And I see no reason why arch specific could do any better (aside from
> sparc which has fancy ipis).
well if the hw can embedd at least 64 bit of dataload in the IPI itself,
we could get rid of a lot of complications. But since we cannot (on x86
and most other architectures), we've got to demultiplex from generic data
which brings up serialization issues and adds overhead .
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