From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [103.22.144.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3xGN2Y24ZGzDqwh for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:46:45 +1000 (AEST) From: Michael Ellerman To: Nicholas Piggin , Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] powerpc/mm: Optimize detection of thread local mm's In-Reply-To: <20170724212533.195cb92b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20170724042803.25848-1-benh@kernel.crashing.org> <20170724042803.25848-5-benh@kernel.crashing.org> <20170724212533.195cb92b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:46:44 +1000 Message-ID: <87h8y2j6bf.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Nicholas Piggin writes: > On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 14:28:02 +1000 > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > >> Instead of comparing the whole CPU mask every time, let's >> keep a counter of how many bits are set in the mask. Thus >> testing for a local mm only requires testing if that counter >> is 1 and the current CPU bit is set in the mask. ... > > Also does it make sense to define it based on NR_CPUS > BITS_PER_LONG? > If it's <= then it should be similar load and compare, no? Do we make a machine with that few CPUs? ;) I don't think it's worth special casing, all the distros run with much much larger NR_CPUs than that. cheers