lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] kmalloc_percpu
On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 03:04:11PM +0530, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> > Doesn't break with sparce CPU #s, but yes, it is inefficient.
> >
>
> If you don't reduce NR_CPUS with CONFIG_NR_CPUS, you waste space (32 bit folks
> won't like it) and if you say change CONFIG_NR_CPUS to 2,
> and we have cpuid 4 on a 2 way you break right? If we have to address these
> issues at all, why can't we use the simpler kmalloc_percpu patch
> which I posted in the morning and avoid so much complexity and arch
> dependency?

We can have something like that for !CONFIG_NUMA and a NUMA-aware
allocator with additional dereferencing cost for CONFIG_NUMA.
Hopefully gains from numa-awareness will more than offset
dereferencing costs.

Thanks
Dipankar
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.088 / U:0.588 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site