lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 0/2] Move x86_cpu_to_apicid to the __read_mostly section
Date
On Monday, May 21, 2012 17:23:48 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Vlad Zolotarov <vlad@scalemp.com> wrote:
> > Pls., consider applying this patch series.
> >
> > It contains the following changes:
> > - Adds two new macros DEFINE_EARLY_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY() and
> >
> > DECLARE_EARLY_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY().
> >
> > - Adds "read-mostly" qualifier to the following variables in smp.h:
> > - cpu_sibling_map
> > - cpu_core_map
> > - cpu_llc_shared_map
> > - cpu_llc_id
> > - cpu_number
> > - x86_cpu_to_apicid
> > - x86_bios_cpu_apicid
> > - x86_cpu_to_logical_apicid
> >
> > As long as all the variables above are only written during the
> > initialization, this change is meant to prevent the false
> > sharing and improve the performance on large multiprocessor
> > systems.
>
> Why have you resent this? The feedback I gave has not been
>
> addressed:

Hmmm... I'm a bit confused. There were two feedbacks/threads: one on "Signed-
off-by" format and the other where u asked for a justification on a vSMP side.

The signed-off format sounded to me as a clear blocker for a series so I fixed
it and respined. I also mentioned it in patch0.

The second thread seams like getting to submitting a separate patch with a doc
under Documents and vSMP testing results explaining and justifying when and
were per-CPU and/or __read_mostly variables should be used.

Pls., correct me if I misunderstood u and let me know what should I do next in
order to make this patch series accepted.

thanks,
vlad


> > Well, a quick tally of percpu variables on a 'make defconfig'
> > kernel would tell us one way or another?
> >
> > Here there's almost 200 percpu variables active in the 64-bit
> > x86 defconfig, and a quick random sample suggests that most
> > are read-mostly.
> >
> > I have no fundamental prefer to either approach, but the
> > direction taken should be justified explicitly, with numbers,
> > arguments, etc. - also a short blurb somewhere in the headers
> > that explains when they should be used, so that others can be
> > aware of vSMP's special needs here.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-05-21 18:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans