Re: [PATCH] percpu data: only iterate over possible CPUs

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton a écrit :
> > Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de> wrote:
> >> On Thursday 09 February 2006 19:04, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>> Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>> The problem was with ACPI just simply looking at the namespace doesnt
> >>>>  exactly give us an idea of how many processors are possible in this platform.
> >>> We need to fix this asap - the performance penalty for HOTPLUG_CPU=y,
> >>> NR_CPUS=lots will be appreciable.
> >> What is this performance penalty exactly? 
> > 
> > All those for_each_cpu() loops will hit NR_CPUS cachelines instead of
> > hweight(cpu_possible_map) cachelines.
> 
> You mean NR_CPUS bits, mostly all included in a single cacheline, and even in 
> a single long word :) for most cases (NR_CPUS <= 32 or 64)
> 

No, I mean cachelines:

static void recalc_bh_state(void)
{
	int i;
	int tot = 0;

	if (__get_cpu_var(bh_accounting).ratelimit++ < 4096)
		return;
	__get_cpu_var(bh_accounting).ratelimit = 0;
	for_each_cpu(i)
		tot += per_cpu(bh_accounting, i).nr;

That's going to hit NR_CPUS cachelines even on a 2-way.

Or am I missing something really obvious here?

(Probably the most expensive ones will be get_page_state() and friends. 
And argh, they're still hardwired to CPU_MASK_ALL).

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/