Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:03:45 -0700 | From | Mike Travis <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses |
| |
Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> 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.)
Thanks, Mike
| |