[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211101111840.GT3891@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2021 11:18:40 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To: Yuan ZhaoXiong <yuanzhaoxiong@...du.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Simplify task_numa_find_cpu()
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 03:25:59PM +0800, Yuan ZhaoXiong wrote:
> Combine the 'cpumask_of_node()' with 'env->p->cpus_ptr' and drop the
> cpumask_test_cpu().
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuan ZhaoXiong <yuanzhaoxiong@...du.com>
This potentially creates of a temporary cpumask variable as noted in the
comment for for_each_cpu_and.
* This saves a temporary CPU mask in many places. It is equivalent to:
* struct cpumask tmp;
* cpumask_and(&tmp, &mask1, &mask2);
* for_each_cpu(cpu, &tmp)
* ...
task_numa_find_cpu() is a relatively deep function. Did you check
the stack usage to make sure it's not pushing too close to the stack
boundary? While there are other users of for_each_cpu_and, they are mostly
shallow although find_energy_efficient_cpu() is a bit questionable and
probably should have used select_idle_mask.
Does the patch have a noticable performance impact?
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists