[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131011060944.GB4975@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 08:09:44 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Optimize the cpu hotplug locking -v2
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > I'm wondering if we can have a for_each_cpu() that only disables
> > preemption in the loop.
>
> I think we'd generally want to have it be something the loop asks for.
>
> If the loop is just some kind of "gather statistics" thing, I don't
> think it's required. The cost per loop is so low (usually adding up a
> couple of words) that the downside drowns the upside.
>
> And we could easily look at MAXSMP (or NR_CPUS) at compile-time, and not
> do it for common small values (although it looks like Fedora defaults to
> 128 CPU's for their distro kernels, which seems a bit excessive - too
> many by far for normal people, too few for the crazy big ones).
Ubuntu has it at 256, so I guess Fedora is even a bit conservative ;-)
Thanks,
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