[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y2VyWDvtwOsMBcKB@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 10:13:12 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/3] blk-cgroup: Flush stats at blkgs destruction path
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 04:12:05PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> I should have named the function cgroup_rstat_css_cpu_flush() to indicate
> that the cpu is a needed parameter. We can have a cgroup_rstat_css_flush()
> in the future if the need arises.
>
> It is an optimization to call this function only if the corresponding cpu
> has a pending lockless list. I could do cpu iteration here and call the
> flushing function for all the CPUs. It is less optimized this way. Since it
> is a slow path, I guess performance is not that critical. So I can go either
> way. Please let me know your preference.
Yeah, cpu_flush is fine. Let's leave it that way.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists