On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Christoph Lameter ([email protected]) wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > So, if the fast path can be done with a preempt off, it might be doable
> > > to suffer the slow path with a per cpu lock like that.
> >
> > Sadly the cmpxchg_local requires local per cpu data access. Isnt there
> > some way to make this less expensive on RT? Acessing cpu local memory is
> > really good for performance on NUMA since the data is optimally placed and
> > one can avoid/reduce locking if the process stays tied to the processor.
> >
>
> On the slow path, in slab_new, we already have to reenable interrupts
> because we can sleep. If we make sure that whenever we return to an irq
> disable code path we take the current per-cpu data structure again, can
> we make the preempt-disable/irq-disabled code paths O(1) ?
Not sure exactly what you are getting at?
This would mean running __alloc_pages tied to one processor even though
waiting is possible?
-
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]
