lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] slab fixes for 3.2-rc4
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Tejun Heo wrote:

> The thing is that irqsafe ones are the "complete" ones. We can use
> irqsafe ones instead of preempt safe ones but not the other way. This
> matters only if flipping irq is noticeably more expensive than
> inc/dec'ing preempt count but I suspect there are enough such
> machines. (cc'ing arch) Does anyone have better insight here? How
> much more expensive are local irq save/restore compared to inc/dec'ing
> preempt count on various archs?

Well that would be a pretty nice simplification of the API.
Replace the fallback code for the preempt safe ones with the
irqsafe fallbacks, then drop the irqsafe variants from percpu.h.

> > The way that the cmpxchg things are used is also similar to transactional
> > memory that is becoming available in the next generation of processors by
> > Intel and that is already available in the current generation of powerpc
> > processors by IBM. It is a way to avoid locking overhead.
>
> Hmmm... how about removing the ones which aren't currently in use?

Yep. Could easily be done. We can resurrect the stuff as needed when other
variants become necessary. In particular the _and and _or etc stuff was
just added to be backward compatible with the old per cpu and local_t
interfaces. There may be no use cases left.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-22 16:03    [W:0.101 / U:1.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site