Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 21 Feb 2009 16:33:41 +0900 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] implement dynamic percpu allocator |
| |
Tejun Heo wrote: > I can remove the TLB problem from non-NUMA case but for NUMA I still > don't have a good idea. Maybe we need to accept the overhead for > NUMA? I don't know.
Hmmmm... one thing we can do on NUMA is to remap and free the remapped address and make __pa() and __va() handle that area specially. It's a bit convoluted but the added overhead should be minimal. It'll only be simple range check in __pa()/__va() and it's not like they are super hot paths anyway. I'll give it a shot.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |