[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511191209000.3898@nanos>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 12:14:01 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
cc: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@...madesigns.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mans Rullgard <mans@...sr.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Sebastian Frias <sebastian_frias@...madesigns.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: Store reg field within struct clocksource
On Thu, 19 Nov 2015, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:42:48AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Nov 2015, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > The basic cause of this problem is the ____cacheline_aligned annotation
> > > which effectively prevents wrapping struct clocksource to provide
> > > implementation specific data.
> > >
> > > Maybe your idea is that struct clocksource should be bloated with all
> > > implementation specific data in the long term?
> >
> > Certainly not. That mmio use case is sane enough, but you are right,
> > that we should try to lift that ____cacheline_aligned restriction.
>
> I don't think the cache line alignment of struct clocksource matters
> anymore - the core timekeeping code no longer uses struct clocksource
> but instead uses struct timekeeper, which caches much of the data from
> struct clocksource. The only member of struct clocksource which it
> does access is max_cycles, which is more than 32 bytes into struct
> clocksource.
>
> So, I see no reason to waste memory with all these struct clocksources
> being bloated out to cacheline alignments. In addition, once
> ____cacheline_aligned is removed, I see no reason for Marc's change
> either.
Right. I completely forgot that I rewrote the core part some time
ago. I'm older than 50, so I'm entitled to use the beginning Alzheimer
excuse. :)
So yes, the alignment of the clocksource struct is not longer
relevant. The case where we access clocksource->max_cycles is when
CONFIG_DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING is enabled, which imposes worse performance
problems to timekeeping than the extra cacheline.
So the simple solution for this issue is indeed the one liner below.
Thanks,
tglx
8<-------------------
--- tip.orig/include/linux/clocksource.h
+++ tip/include/linux/clocksource.h
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ struct clocksource {
cycle_t wd_last;
#endif
struct module *owner;
-} ____cacheline_aligned;
+}
/*
* Clock source flags bits::
--
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