From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
davej@codemonkey.org.uk, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPUMASK: proposal for replacing cpumask_t
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 08:02:59 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200809130803.00563.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48CA7CA8.2000107@sgi.com>
On Saturday 13 September 2008 00:28:56 Mike Travis wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > I'm yet to be convinced that we really need to allocate cpumasks in any
> > fast paths. And if not, we should simply allocate them everywhere. I'd
> > rather see one #ifdef around a place where we can show a perf issue.
>
> Using a typedef came from Linus, and the idea is basically if NR_CPUS fits
> into a long, then it's carried as an array of one (ie., local variable).
Sure it's clever. ie. nice and confusing.
But do we have any code paths where we care? Unless we do, let's just keep it
simple...
Cheers,
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-12 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-06 23:50 [RFC 00/13] smp: reduce stack requirements for genapic send_IPI_mask functions Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 01/13] smp: modify send_IPI_mask interface to accept cpumask_t pointers Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 02/13] cpumask: add for_each_online_cpu_mask_nr function Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 03/13] xen: use new " Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 04/13] cpumask: add cpumask_ptr operations Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 05/13] cpumask: add get_cpumask_var debug operations Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 06/13] genapic: use get_cpumask_var operations for allbutself cpumask_ts Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 07/13] sched: Reduce stack size requirements in kernel/sched.c Mike Travis
2008-09-07 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-07 11:00 ` Andrew Morton
2008-09-07 13:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-08 14:56 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-07 20:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-08 14:54 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-08 15:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-08 18:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-10 22:47 ` [RFC] CPUMASK: proposal for replacing cpumask_t Mike Travis
2008-09-10 22:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-10 23:33 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-11 5:21 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-11 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-11 15:04 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-12 4:55 ` Rusty Russell
2008-09-12 14:28 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-12 22:02 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2008-09-12 22:50 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-12 22:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 08/13] cpufreq: Reduce stack size requirements in acpi-cpufreq.c Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 09/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 1 temp cpumask_ts Mike Travis
2008-09-08 11:01 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-08 16:03 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 10/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 2 internal abi Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 11/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 3 target_cpus Mike Travis
2008-09-07 7:55 ` Bert Wesarg
2008-09-07 9:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-08 15:01 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-08 15:29 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 12/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 4 vector allocation Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 13/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 5 cpu_mask_to_apicid Mike Travis
2008-09-07 7:36 ` [RFC 00/13] smp: reduce stack requirements for genapic send_IPI_mask functions Ingo Molnar
2008-09-08 15:17 ` Mike Travis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200809130803.00563.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).