[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:02:48 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
mingo@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, tj@...nel.org, sbw@....edu,
amit.kucheria@...aro.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, rjw@...k.pl,
wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/9] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs to prevent CPU
offline from atomic context
On 12/12, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>
> On 12/12/2012 10:47 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Why it needs to be per-cpu? It can be global and __read_mostly to avoid
> > the false-sharing. OK, perhaps to put reader_percpu_refcnt/writer_signal
> > into a single cacheline...
>
> Even I realized this (that we could use a global) after posting out the
> series.. But do you think that it would be better to retain the per-cpu
> variant itself, due to the cache effects?
I don't really know, up to you. This was the question ;)
> > Do we really need local_irq_save/restore in put_ ?
> >
>
> Hmm.. good point! I don't think we need it.
And _perhaps_ get_ can avoid it too?
I didn't really try to think, probably this is not right, but can't
something like this work?
#define XXXX (1 << 16)
#define MASK (XXXX -1)
void get_online_cpus_atomic(void)
{
preempt_disable();
// only for writer
__this_cpu_add(reader_percpu_refcnt, XXXX);
if (__this_cpu_read(reader_percpu_refcnt) & MASK) {
__this_cpu_inc(reader_percpu_refcnt);
} else {
smp_wmb();
if (writer_active()) {
...
}
}
__this_cpu_dec(reader_percpu_refcnt, XXXX);
}
void put_online_cpus_atomic(void)
{
if (__this_cpu_read(reader_percpu_refcnt) & MASK)
__this_cpu_dec(reader_percpu_refcnt);
else
read_unlock(&hotplug_rwlock);
preempt_enable();
}
Oleg.
--
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