[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e38f71f7-dfdb-5575-a028-96e696d2d13e@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:48:44 +0800
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To: Li RongQing <lirongqing@...du.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][v2] xfrm: replace NR_CPU with nr_cpu_ids
On 2018/6/19 15:11, Li RongQing wrote:
> The default NR_CPUS can be very large, but actual possible nr_cpu_ids
> usually is very small. For some x86 distribution, the NR_CPUS is 8192
> and nr_cpu_ids is 4, so replace NR_CPU to save some memory
>
> Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <lirongqing@...du.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Li <wangli39@...du.com>
> ---
> net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> index 40b54cc64243..f8188685c1e9 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> @@ -2989,11 +2989,11 @@ void __init xfrm_init(void)
> {
> int i;
>
> - xfrm_pcpu_work = kmalloc_array(NR_CPUS, sizeof(*xfrm_pcpu_work),
> + xfrm_pcpu_work = kmalloc_array(nr_cpu_ids, sizeof(*xfrm_pcpu_work),
> GFP_KERNEL);
It seems that xfrm_pcpu_work is not used anymore, maybe it can be deleted to
save more memory.
> BUG_ON(!xfrm_pcpu_work);
>
> - for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_cpu_ids; i++)
> INIT_WORK(&xfrm_pcpu_work[i], xfrm_pcpu_work_fn);
>
> register_pernet_subsys(&xfrm_net_ops);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists