On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 11:40:51AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > The balancing operation is not that frequent and having to treat a special
> > case in the callers would make code more complicated and likely offset the
> > gains in this function.
>
> This solution as such is not accurate and clean :) and my suggestion is
> not making it any more ugly.
>
> With increase in NR_CPUS, cost of cpumask operations will increase and
> we shouldn't penalize the other logical threads or cores sharing the caches by
> bringing in unnecessary cache lines.
One cacheline sized 128bytes will support all 1024 cpus that IA64 allows.
cacheline align the cpumask?
-
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]
