On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 09:55:02AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > If I'm following you correctly, this adds another dependent load
> > to a per-CPU data access, and from memory that isn't node-affine.
>
> I am also concerned about that. Kiran has a patch to avoid allocpercpu
> having to go through one level of indirection that I guess would no
> longer work with this scheme.
The alloc_percpu reimplementation would work regardless of changes to
static per-cpu areas. But, any extra indirection as was proposed initially
is bad IMHO.
>
> > If so, I think people with SMP and NUMA kernels would care more
> > about performance and scalability than the few k of memory this
> > saves.
>
> Right.
Me too :)
Kiran
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
