[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110221033235.GW5818@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 04:32:35 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] perf: Optimise topology iteration
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:29:24AM +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 05:15 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 12:57:39AM +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> > > Currently we iterate the full machine looking for a matching core_id/nb
> > > for the percore and the amd northbridge stuff , using a smaller topology
> > > mask makes sense.
> >
> > This is still wrong for CPU hotplug. The CPU "owning" the per core
> > does not necessarily need to be online anymore.
>
> This is remain issue for hotplug case, no matter we use
> for_each_online_cpu or topology_thread_cpumask.
The original code I submitted used for_each_possible_cpu which
is correct.
>
> > Please drop this patch.
>
> Re-look at the code, I think for_each_online_cpu is wrong for percore,
> we should use topology_thread_cpumask instead.
No, that's also cleared on unplug. You really need the possible map
and nothing else.
-Andi
--
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