lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2] x86, x2apic: minimize IPI register writes using cluster groups v4

* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 05/02/2011 07:05 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ...
> >>
> >> Ingo, would it be fine to make apic->init() either _before_ this series or
> >> on top of them (because if I introduce it inside this particular patch it
> >> would contain some unrelated code snippets such as .init = NULL for all apics
> >> declaration).
> >
> > Of course it should be a separate patch - even this patch looks a bit large -
> > any way to split it up further?
>
> Well, for this particular path the only minimum is used, so i fear there is no
> way to split it, probably I could drop some 'cleanup' bits from it and make it
> a separate one. Gimme some time.

Well, first try to do *all* preparatory and cleanup changes that have low
regression risk.

*Then* keep the most dangerous part to the end of it - so that it's easily
reverted, should the need arise. Preferably the dangerous part should be much
smaller than:

3 files changed, 136 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)

And no, it is not at all true that there is 'no way' to split the patch up any
further: you could certainly add the data structures, init methods and such
support code (which is low regression risk) in a separate patch than the
changes that modify the existing x2apic_send_IPI_mask_allbutself() function and
such.

Also, the loop body in the new __x2apic_send_IPI_mask() function could
certainly be split out into a helper inline, making the code flow clearer.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-05-03 08:33    [W:0.060 / U:0.668 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site