[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ6HWG7H1EtWRcNLc=Ka-PGnJ9MRQ0Ft8PHBRnwadRNRSUxjEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 13:15:27 -0300
From: Leonardo Bras Soares Passos <leobras@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
Imran Khan <imran.f.khan@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] smp: Change function signatures to use call_single_data_t
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 11:10 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 03:31:28AM -0300, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > call_single_data_t is a size-aligned typedef of struct __call_single_data.
> >
> > This alignment is desirable in order to have smp_call_function*() avoid
> > bouncing an extra cacheline in case of an unaligned csd, given this
> > would hurt performance.
> >
> > Since the removal of struct request->csd in commit 660e802c76c8
> > ("blk-mq: use percpu csd to remote complete instead of per-rq csd") there
> > are no current users of smp_call_function*() with unaligned csd.
> >
> > Change every 'struct __call_single_data' function parameter to
> > 'call_single_data_t', so we have warnings if any new code tries to
> > introduce an smp_call_function*() call with unaligned csd.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Bras <leobras@...hat.com>
>
> Fair enough, I'll go queue it somewhere.
>
Thanks Peter!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists