lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] consolidate WARN_...ONCE() static variables
>>> On 28.02.12 at 01:03, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 15:10:34 +0000
> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
>> Due to the alignment of following variables, these typically consume
>> more than just the single byte that 'bool' requires, and as there are
>> a few hundred instances, the cache pollution (not so much the waste of
>> memory) sums up. Put these variables into their own section, outside
>> of any half way frequently used memory range.
>>
>> v2: Do the same also to the __warned variable of rcu_lockdep_assert().
>> (Don't, however, include the ones used by printk_once() and alike, as
>> they can potentially be hot.)
>
> I have a bad feeling that I still don't understand this patch. Ho hum.
>
> What are the rules for the new .data.unlikely section? When should
> people put variables into this section? Perhaps we can document this
> somewhere?

If I knew the "where" part of this, I could put together a few sentences.
I just grep-ed through Documentation/, without finding e.g. any rules
or guidelines for using {,un}likely()...

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-28 08:43    [W:0.055 / U:0.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site