On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 09:55:02AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > If I'm following you correctly, this adds another dependent load > > to a per-CPU data access, and from memory that isn't node-affine. > > I am also concerned about that. Kiran has a patch to avoid allocpercpu > having to go through one level of indirection that I guess would no > longer work with this scheme. The alloc_percpu reimplementation would work regardless of changes to static per-cpu areas. But, any extra indirection as was proposed initially is bad IMHO. > > > If so, I think people with SMP and NUMA kernels would care more > > about performance and scalability than the few k of memory this > > saves. > > Right. Me too :) Kiran
