> cpu_local_inc() does all this: it takes the name of a local_t var, and is > expected to increment this cpu's version of that. You ripped this out and > called it CPU_INC(). Hi, I'm attempting to test both approaches to compare the object generated in order to understand the issues involved here. Here's my code: void test_cpu_inc(int *s) { __CPU_INC(s); } void test_local_inc(local_t *t) { __local_inc(THIS_CPU(t)); } void test_cpu_local_inc(local_t *t) { __cpu_local_inc(t); } But I don't know how I can use cpu_local_inc because the pointer to the object is not &__get_cpu_var(l): #define __cpu_local_inc(l) cpu_local_inc((l)) #define cpu_local_inc(l) cpu_local_wrap(local_inc(&__get_cpu_var((l)))) At the minimum, we would need a new local_t op to get the correct CPU_ALLOC'd pointer value for the increment. These new local_t ops for CPU_ALLOC'd variables could use CPU_XXX primitives to implement them, or just a base val_to_ptr primitive to replace __get_cpu_var(). I did notice this in local.h: * X86_64: This could be done better if we moved the per cpu data directly * after GS. ... which it now is, so true per_cpu variables could be optimized better as well. Also, the above cpu_local_wrap(...) adds: #define cpu_local_wrap(l) \ ({ \ preempt_disable(); \ (l); \ preempt_enable(); \ }) \ ... and there isn't a non-preemption version that I can find. Here are the objects. 0000000000000000 <test_cpu_inc>: 0: 55 push %rbp 1: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp 4: 48 83 ec 08 sub $0x8,%rsp 8: 48 89 7d f8 mov %rdi,0xfffffffffffffff8(%rbp) c: 65 48 ff 45 f8 incq %gs:0xfffffffffffffff8(%rbp) 11: c9 leaveq 12: c3 retq 0000000000000013 <test_local_inc>: 13: 55 push %rbp 14: 65 48 8b 05 00 00 00 mov %gs:0(%rip),%rax # 1c <test_local_inc+0x9> 1b: 00 1c: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp 1f: 48 ff 04 07 incq (%rdi,%rax,1) 23: c9 leaveq 24: c3 retq With a new local_t op then test_local_inc probably could be optimized to be the same instructions as test_cpu_inc. One other distinction is CPU_INC increments an arbitrary sized variable while local_inc requires a local_t variable. This may not make it usable in all cases. Thanks, Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html