[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOtvUMeAkPzcZtiPggacMQGa0EywTH5SzcXgWjMtssR6a5KFqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 10:25:46 +0200
From: Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Kosaki Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>
Subject: Re: [v7 0/8] Reduce cross CPU IPI interference
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 12:01 +0200, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> > Gilad Ben-Yossef (8):
> > smp: introduce a generic on_each_cpu_mask function
> > arm: move arm over to generic on_each_cpu_mask
> > tile: move tile to use generic on_each_cpu_mask
> > smp: add func to IPI cpus based on parameter func
> > slub: only IPI CPUs that have per cpu obj to flush
> > fs: only send IPI to invalidate LRU BH when needed
> > mm: only IPI CPUs to drain local pages if they exist
>
> These patches look very nice!
>
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
>
Thank you :-)
If this is of interest, I keep a list tracking global IPI and global
task schedulers sources in the core kernel here:
https://github.com/gby/linux/wiki.
I plan to visit all these potential interference source to see if
something can be done to lower their effect on
isolated CPUs over time.
>
> > mm: add vmstat counters for tracking PCP drains
> >
> I understood from previous postings this patch wasn't meant for
> inclusion, if it is, note that cpumask_weight() is a potentially very
> expensive operation.
Right. The only purpose of the patch is to show the usefulness
of the previous patch in the series. It is not meant for mainline.
Thanks,
Gilad
--
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker
gilad@...yossef.com
Israel Cell: +972-52-8260388
US Cell: +1-973-8260388
http://benyossef.com
"Unfortunately, cache misses are an equal opportunity pain provider."
-- Mike Galbraith, LKML
--
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