On Tue, 24 Apr 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > > Would this not also be a good case to introduce static branching? > > > > number_of_cpusets is used to avoid going through unnecessary processing > > should there be no cpusets in use. > > static branches comes with a set of problems themselves, so I usually prefer > to use them only in places where we don't want to pay even a cache miss if we > can avoid, or a function call, or anything like that - like the slub cache > alloc as you may have seen in my kmem memcg series. > > It doesn't seem to be the case here. How did you figure that? number_of_cpusets was introduced exactly because the functions are used in places where we do not pay the cost of calling __cpuset_node_allowed_soft/hardwall. Have a look at these. They may take locks etc etc in critical allocation paths -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
