Re: [02/17][PATCH] Implement smp_call_function_mask for ia64 - V8

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
From 697d50286088e98da5ac8653c80aaa96c81abf87 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiantao Zhang <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:50:24 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] KVM:IA64: Implement smp_call_function_mask for ia64

This function provides more flexible interface for smp
infrastructure.
Signed-off-by: Xiantao Zhang <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>

Hi Xiantao,

I'm a little wary of the performance impact of this change. Doing a
cpumask compare on all smp_call_function calls seems a little expensive.
Maybe it's just noise in the big picture compared to the actual cost of
the IPIs, but I thought I'd bring it up.

Keep in mind that a cpumask can be fairly big these days, max NR_CPUS
is currently 4096. For those booting a kernel with NR_CPUS at 4096 on
a dual CPU machine, it would be a bit expensive.

Why not keep smp_call_function() the way it was before, rather than
implementing it via the call to smp_call_function_mask()?

Cheers,
Jes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Sparc Linux]     [DCCP]     [Linux ARM]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux x86_64]     [Linux for Ham Radio]

  Powered by Linux