[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses
    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > * Mike Travis <> wrote:
    >>> This fragility makes me very nervous. It seems hard enough to get
    >>> this stuff working with current tools; making it work over the whole
    >>> range of supported tools looks like its going to be hard.
    >> (me too ;-)
    >> Once I get a solid version working with (at least) gcc-4.2.4, then
    >> regression testing with older tools will be easier, or at least a
    >> table of results can be produced.
    > the problem is, we cannot just put it even into tip/master if there's no
    > short-term hope of fixing a problem it triggers. gcc-4.2.3 is solid for
    > me otherwise, for series of thousands of randomly built kernels.

    Great, I'll request we load gcc-4.2.3 on our devel server.

    > can we just leave out the zero-based percpu stuff safely and could i
    > test the rest of your series - or are there dependencies? I think
    > zero-based percpu, while nice in theory, is probably just a very small
    > positive effect so it's not a life or death issue. (or is there any
    > deeper, semantic reason why we'd want it?)

    I sort of assumed that zero-based would not make it into 2.6.26-rcX,
    and no, reaching 4096 cpus does not require it. The other patches
    I've been submitting are more general and will fix possible panics
    (like stack overflows, etc.)


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-09 23:07    [W:0.020 / U:24.604 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site