On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 15:25 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: 
> >>> On 05.10.12 at 16:08, Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
> > @@ -287,22 +344,26 @@ static inline void
> >          }
> >          else
> >          {
> > -            cpumask_t idle_mask;
> > +            cpumask_t idle_mask, balance_mask;
> 
> Be _very_ careful about adding on-stack CPU mask variables
> (also further below): each one of them grows the stack frame
> by 512 bytes (when building for the current maximum of 4095
> CPUs), which is generally too much; you may want to consider
> pre-allocated scratch space instead.
> 
I see your point, and I think you're right... I wasn't "thinking that
big". :-)

I'll look into all of these situations and see if I can move the masks
off the stack. Any preference between global variables and members of
one of the scheduler's data structures?

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)