From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, jeremy@goop.org,
cpw@sgi.com, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] percpu: implement new dynamic percpu allocator
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 02:10:15 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090219021015.aac6ea43.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1234958676-27618-10-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org>
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:04:35 +0900 Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> Impact: new scalable dynamic percpu allocator which allows dynamic
> percpu areas to be accessed the same way as static ones
>
> Implement scalable dynamic percpu allocator which can be used for both
> static and dynamic percpu areas. This will allow static and dynamic
> areas to share faster direct access methods. This feature is optional
> and enabled only when CONFIG_HAVE_DYNAMIC_PER_CPU_AREA is defined by
> arch. Please read comment on top of mm/percpu.c for details.
>
>
> ...
>
> +static void *percpu_modalloc(unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> + const char *name)
> +{
> + void *ptr;
> +
> + if (align > PAGE_SIZE) {
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: per-cpu alignment %li > %li\n",
> + name, align, PAGE_SIZE);
It used to be the case that PAGE_SIZE has type `unsigned' on some
architectures and `unsigned long' on others. I don't know if that was
fixed - probably not.
> + align = PAGE_SIZE;
> + }
> +
> + ptr = __alloc_percpu(size, align);
> + if (!ptr)
> + printk(KERN_WARNING
> + "Could not allocate %lu bytes percpu data\n", size);
A dump_stack() here would be useful.
> + return ptr;
> +}
> +
> +static void percpu_modfree(void *freeme)
> +{
> + free_percpu(freeme);
> +}
> +
> +#else /* ... !CONFIG_HAVE_DYNAMIC_PER_CPU_AREA */
> +
>
> ...
>
> +/*
> + * linux/mm/percpu.c - percpu memory allocator
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2009 SUSE Linux Products GmbH
> + * Copyright (C) 2009 Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> + *
> + * This file is released under the GPLv2.
> + *
> + * This is percpu allocator which can handle both static and dynamic
> + * areas. Percpu areas are allocated in chunks in vmalloc area. Each
> + * chunk is consisted of num_possible_cpus() units and the first chunk
> + * is used for static percpu variables in the kernel image (special
> + * boot time alloc/init handling necessary as these areas need to be
> + * brought up before allocation services are running). Unit grows as
> + * necessary and all units grow or shrink in unison. When a chunk is
> + * filled up, another chunk is allocated. ie. in vmalloc area
> + *
> + * c0 c1 c2
> + * ------------------- ------------------- ------------
> + * | u0 | u1 | u2 | u3 | | u0 | u1 | u2 | u3 | | u0 | u1 | u
> + * ------------------- ...... ------------------- .... ------------
> + *
> + * Allocation is done in offset-size areas of single unit space. Ie,
> + * when UNIT_SIZE is 128k, an area at 134k of 512 bytes occupies 512
> + * bytes at 6k of c1:u0, c1:u1, c1:u2 and c1:u3. Percpu access can be
> + * done by configuring percpu base registers UNIT_SIZE apart.
> + *
> + * There are usually many small percpu allocations many of them as
> + * small as 4 bytes. The allocator organizes chunks into lists
> + * according to free size and tries to allocate from the fullest one.
> + * Each chunk keeps the maximum contiguous area size hint which is
> + * guaranteed to be eqaul to or larger than the maximum contiguous
> + * area in the chunk. This helps the allocator not to iterate the
> + * chunk maps unnecessarily.
> + *
> + * Allocation state in each chunk is kept using an array of integers.
> + * A positive value represents free region and negative allocated.
> + * Allocation inside a chunk is done by scanning this map sequentially
> + * and serving the first matching entry. This is mostly copied from
> + * the percpu_modalloc() allocator. Chunks are also linked into a rb
> + * tree to ease address to chunk mapping during free.
> + *
> + * To use this allocator, arch code should do the followings.
> + *
> + * - define CONFIG_HAVE_DYNAMIC_PER_CPU_AREA
> + *
> + * - define __addr_to_pcpu_ptr() and __pcpu_ptr_to_addr() to translate
> + * regular address to percpu pointer and back
> + *
> + * - use pcpu_setup_static() during percpu area initialization to
> + * setup kernel static percpu area
> + */
afacit nobody has answered your "is num_possible_cpus() ever a lot
larger than num_online_cpus()" question.
It is fairly important.
> +#include <linux/bitmap.h>
> +#include <linux/bootmem.h>
> +#include <linux/list.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/mutex.h>
> +#include <linux/percpu.h>
> +#include <linux/pfn.h>
> +#include <linux/rbtree.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
> +
> +#include <asm/cacheflush.h>
> +#include <asm/tlbflush.h>
> +
> +#define PCPU_MIN_UNIT_PAGES_SHIFT 4 /* also max alloc size */
> +#define PCPU_SLOT_BASE_SHIFT 5 /* 1-31 shares the same slot */
> +#define PCPU_DFL_MAP_ALLOC 16 /* start a map with 16 ents */
> +
> +struct pcpu_chunk {
> + struct list_head list; /* linked to pcpu_slot lists */
> + struct rb_node rb_node; /* key is chunk->vm->addr */
> + int free_size;
what's this?
> + int contig_hint; /* max contiguous size hint */
> + struct vm_struct *vm;
?
> + int map_used; /* # of map entries used */
> + int map_alloc; /* # of map entries allocated */
> + int *map;
?
> + struct page *page[]; /* #cpus * UNIT_PAGES */
"pages" ;)
> +};
> +
> +#define SIZEOF_STRUCT_PCPU_CHUNK \
> + (sizeof(struct pcpu_chunk) + \
> + (num_possible_cpus() << PCPU_UNIT_PAGES_SHIFT) * sizeof(struct page *))
This macro generates real code. It is misleading to pretend that it is
a compile-time constant. Suggest that it be converted to a plain old C
function.
> +static int __pcpu_unit_pages_shift = PCPU_MIN_UNIT_PAGES_SHIFT;
> +static int __pcpu_unit_pages;
> +static int __pcpu_unit_shift;
> +static int __pcpu_unit_size;
> +static int __pcpu_chunk_size;
> +static int __pcpu_nr_slots;
> +
> +/* currently everything is power of two, there's no hard dependency on it tho */
> +#define PCPU_UNIT_PAGES_SHIFT ((int)__pcpu_unit_pages_shift)
> +#define PCPU_UNIT_PAGES ((int)__pcpu_unit_pages)
> +#define PCPU_UNIT_SHIFT ((int)__pcpu_unit_shift)
> +#define PCPU_UNIT_SIZE ((int)__pcpu_unit_size)
> +#define PCPU_CHUNK_SIZE ((int)__pcpu_chunk_size)
> +#define PCPU_NR_SLOTS ((int)__pcpu_nr_slots)
hm. Why do these exist?
Again, they look like compile-time constants, but aren't.
> +/* the address of the first chunk which starts with the kernel static area */
> +void *pcpu_base_addr;
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pcpu_base_addr);
> +
>
> ...
>
> +/**
> + * pcpu_realloc - versatile realloc
> + * @p: the current pointer (can be NULL for new allocations)
> + * @size: the current size (can be 0 for new allocations)
> + * @new_size: the wanted new size (can be 0 for free)
So the allocator doesn't internally record the size of each hunk?
<squints at the undocumented `free_size'>
> + * More robust realloc which can be used to allocate, resize or free a
> + * memory area of arbitrary size. If the needed size goes over
> + * PAGE_SIZE, kernel VM is used.
> + *
> + * RETURNS:
> + * The new pointer on success, NULL on failure.
> + */
> +static void *pcpu_realloc(void *p, size_t size, size_t new_size)
> +{
> + void *new;
> +
> + if (new_size <= PAGE_SIZE)
> + new = kmalloc(new_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + else
> + new = vmalloc(new_size);
> + if (new_size && !new)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + memcpy(new, p, min(size, new_size));
> + if (new_size > size)
> + memset(new + size, 0, new_size - size);
> +
> + if (size <= PAGE_SIZE)
> + kfree(p);
> + else
> + vfree(p);
> +
> + return new;
> +}
This function can be called under spinlock if new_size>PAGE_SIZE and
the kernel won't (I think) warn. If new_size<=PAGE_SIZE, the kernel
will warn.
Methinks vmalloc() should have a might_sleep(). Dunno.
> +/**
> + * pcpu_chunk_relocate - put chunk in the appropriate chunk slot
> + * @chunk: chunk of interest
> + * @oslot: the previous slot it was on
> + *
> + * This function is called after an allocation or free changed @chunk.
> + * New slot according to the changed state is determined and @chunk is
> + * moved to the slot.
Locking requirements?
> + */
> +static void pcpu_chunk_relocate(struct pcpu_chunk *chunk, int oslot)
> +{
> + int nslot = pcpu_chunk_slot(chunk);
> +
> + if (oslot != nslot) {
> + if (oslot < nslot)
> + list_move(&chunk->list, &pcpu_slot[nslot]);
> + else
> + list_move_tail(&chunk->list, &pcpu_slot[nslot]);
> + }
> +}
> +
>
> ...
>
> +static int pcpu_alloc_area(struct pcpu_chunk *chunk, int size, int align)
> +{
> + int oslot = pcpu_chunk_slot(chunk);
> + int max_contig = 0;
> + int i, off;
> +
> + /*
> + * The static chunk initially doesn't have map attached
> + * because kmalloc wasn't available during init. Give it one.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(!chunk->map)) {
> + chunk->map = pcpu_realloc(NULL, 0,
> + PCPU_DFL_MAP_ALLOC * sizeof(chunk->map[0]));
> + if (!chunk->map)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + chunk->map_alloc = PCPU_DFL_MAP_ALLOC;
> + chunk->map[chunk->map_used++] = -pcpu_static_size;
> + if (chunk->free_size)
> + chunk->map[chunk->map_used++] = chunk->free_size;
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0, off = 0; i < chunk->map_used; off += abs(chunk->map[i++])) {
> + bool is_last = i + 1 == chunk->map_used;
> + int head, tail;
> +
> + /* extra for alignment requirement */
> + head = ALIGN(off, align) - off;
> + BUG_ON(i == 0 && head != 0);
> +
> + if (chunk->map[i] < 0)
> + continue;
> + if (chunk->map[i] < head + size) {
> + max_contig = max(chunk->map[i], max_contig);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * If head is small or the previous block is free,
> + * merge'em. Note that 'small' is defined as smaller
> + * than sizeof(int), which is very small but isn't too
> + * uncommon for percpu allocations.
> + */
> + if (head && (head < sizeof(int) || chunk->map[i - 1] > 0)) {
> + if (chunk->map[i - 1] > 0)
> + chunk->map[i - 1] += head;
> + else {
> + chunk->map[i - 1] -= head;
> + chunk->free_size -= head;
> + }
> + chunk->map[i] -= head;
> + off += head;
> + head = 0;
> + }
> +
> + /* if tail is small, just keep it around */
> + tail = chunk->map[i] - head - size;
> + if (tail < sizeof(int))
> + tail = 0;
> +
> + /* split if warranted */
> + if (head || tail) {
> + if (pcpu_split_block(chunk, i, head, tail))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + if (head) {
> + i++;
> + off += head;
> + max_contig = max(chunk->map[i - 1], max_contig);
> + }
> + if (tail)
> + max_contig = max(chunk->map[i + 1], max_contig);
> + }
> +
> + /* update hint and mark allocated */
> + if (is_last)
> + chunk->contig_hint = max_contig; /* fully scanned */
> + else
> + chunk->contig_hint = max(chunk->contig_hint,
> + max_contig);
> +
> + chunk->free_size -= chunk->map[i];
> + chunk->map[i] = -chunk->map[i];
When pcpu_chunk.map gets documented, please also explain the
significance of negative entries in there.
> + pcpu_chunk_relocate(chunk, oslot);
> + return off;
> + }
> +
> + chunk->contig_hint = max_contig; /* fully scanned */
> + pcpu_chunk_relocate(chunk, oslot);
> + return -ENOSPC;
"No space left on device".
This is not a disk drive.
> +}
> +
>
> ...
>
> +static void pcpu_depopulate_chunk(struct pcpu_chunk *chunk, size_t off,
> + size_t size, bool flush)
> +{
> + int page_start = PFN_DOWN(off);
> + int page_end = PFN_UP(off + size);
> + int unmap_start = -1;
> + int uninitialized_var(unmap_end);
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = page_start; i < page_end; i++) {
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + struct page **pagep = pcpu_chunk_pagep(chunk, cpu, i);
> +
> + if (!*pagep)
> + continue;
> +
> + __free_page(*pagep);
> + *pagep = NULL;
Why did *pagep get zeroed? Needs comment?
> + unmap_start = unmap_start < 0 ? i : unmap_start;
> + unmap_end = i + 1;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (unmap_start >= 0)
> + pcpu_unmap(chunk, unmap_start, unmap_end, flush);
> +}
> +
>
> ...
>
> +/**
> + * pcpu_populate_chunk - populate and map an area of a pcpu_chunk
> + * @chunk: chunk of interest
> + * @off: offset to the area to populate
> + * @size: size of the area to populate
> + *
> + * For each cpu, populate and map pages [@page_start,@page_end) into
> + * @chunk. The area is cleared on return.
> + */
> +static int pcpu_populate_chunk(struct pcpu_chunk *chunk, int off, int size)
> +{
> + const gfp_t alloc_mask = GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_COLD;
A designed decision has been made to not permit the caller to specify
the allocation mode?
Usually a mistake. Probably appropriate in this case. Should be
mentioned up-front and discussed a bit.
> + int page_start = PFN_DOWN(off);
> + int page_end = PFN_UP(off + size);
> + int map_start = -1;
> + int map_end;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = page_start; i < page_end; i++) {
> + if (pcpu_chunk_page_occupied(chunk, i)) {
> + if (map_start >= 0) {
> + if (pcpu_map(chunk, map_start, map_end))
> + goto err;
> + map_start = -1;
> + }
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + map_start = map_start < 0 ? i : map_start;
> + map_end = i + 1;
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + struct page **pagep = pcpu_chunk_pagep(chunk, cpu, i);
> +
> + *pagep = alloc_pages_node(cpu_to_node(cpu),
> + alloc_mask, 0);
> + if (!*pagep)
> + goto err;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (map_start >= 0 && pcpu_map(chunk, map_start, map_end))
> + goto err;
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> + memset(chunk->vm->addr + (cpu << PCPU_UNIT_SHIFT) + off, 0,
> + size);
> +
> + return 0;
> +err:
> + /* likely under heavy memory pressure, give memory back */
> + pcpu_depopulate_chunk(chunk, off, size, true);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
> +static void free_pcpu_chunk(struct pcpu_chunk *chunk)
> +{
> + if (!chunk)
> + return;
afaict this test is unneeded.
> + if (chunk->vm)
> + free_vm_area(chunk->vm);
I didn't check whether this one is needed.
> + pcpu_realloc(chunk->map, chunk->map_alloc * sizeof(chunk->map[0]), 0);
> + kfree(chunk);
> +}
> +
>
> ...
>
> +/**
> + * __alloc_percpu - allocate percpu area
> + * @size: size of area to allocate
> + * @align: alignment of area (max PAGE_SIZE)
> + *
> + * Allocate percpu area of @size bytes aligned at @align. Might
> + * sleep. Might trigger writeouts.
> + *
> + * RETURNS:
> + * Percpu pointer to the allocated area on success, NULL on failure.
> + */
> +void *__alloc_percpu(size_t size, size_t align)
> +{
> + void *ptr = NULL;
> + struct pcpu_chunk *chunk;
> + int slot, off, err;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!size))
> + return NULL;
hm. Why do we do this? Perhaps emitting this warning:
> + if (unlikely(size > PAGE_SIZE << PCPU_MIN_UNIT_PAGES_SHIFT ||
> + align > PAGE_SIZE)) {
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "illegal size (%zu) or align (%zu) for "
> + "percpu allocation\n", size, align);
would be more appropriate.
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + mutex_lock(&pcpu_mutex);
OK, so we do GFP_KERNEL allocations under this lock, so vast amounts of
kernel code (filesystems, page reclaim, block/io) are not allowed to do
per-cpu allocations.
I doubt if there's a problem with that, but it's worth pointing out.
> + /* allocate area */
> + for (slot = pcpu_size_to_slot(size); slot < PCPU_NR_SLOTS; slot++) {
> + list_for_each_entry(chunk, &pcpu_slot[slot], list) {
> + if (size > chunk->contig_hint)
> + continue;
> + err = pcpu_alloc_area(chunk, size, align);
> + if (err >= 0) {
> + off = err;
> + goto area_found;
> + }
> + if (err != -ENOSPC)
> + goto out_unlock;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* hmmm... no space left, create a new chunk */
> + err = -ENOMEM;
This statement is unneeded.
> + chunk = alloc_pcpu_chunk();
> + if (!chunk)
> + goto out_unlock;
> + pcpu_chunk_relocate(chunk, -1);
> + pcpu_chunk_addr_insert(chunk);
> +
> + err = pcpu_alloc_area(chunk, size, align);
> + if (err < 0)
> + goto out_unlock;
> + off = err;
It would be cleaner to do
off = pcpu_alloc_area(chunk, size, align);
if (off < 0)
goto out_unlock;
> +area_found:
> + /* populate, map and clear the area */
> + if (pcpu_populate_chunk(chunk, off, size)) {
> + pcpu_free_area(chunk, off);
> + goto out_unlock;
> + }
> +
> + ptr = __addr_to_pcpu_ptr(chunk->vm->addr + off);
> +out_unlock:
> + mutex_unlock(&pcpu_mutex);
> + return ptr;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__alloc_percpu);
> +
>
> ...
>
> +/**
> + * free_percpu - free percpu area
> + * @ptr: pointer to area to free
> + *
> + * Free percpu area @ptr. Might sleep.
> + */
> +void free_percpu(void *ptr)
> +{
> + void *addr = __pcpu_ptr_to_addr(ptr);
> + struct pcpu_chunk *chunk;
> + int off;
> +
> + if (!ptr)
> + return;
Do we ever do this? Should it be permitted? Should we warn?
> + mutex_lock(&pcpu_mutex);
> +
> + chunk = pcpu_chunk_addr_search(addr);
> + off = addr - chunk->vm->addr;
> +
> + pcpu_free_area(chunk, off);
> +
> + /* the chunk became fully free, kill one if there are other free ones */
> + if (chunk->free_size == PCPU_UNIT_SIZE) {
> + struct pcpu_chunk *pos;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(pos,
> + &pcpu_slot[pcpu_chunk_slot(chunk)], list)
> + if (pos != chunk) {
> + pcpu_kill_chunk(pos);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&pcpu_mutex);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(free_percpu);
> +
> +/**
> + * pcpu_setup_static - initialize kernel static percpu area
> + * @populate_pte_fn: callback to allocate pagetable
> + * @pages: num_possible_cpus() * PFN_UP(cpu_size) pages
> + *
> + * Initialize kernel static percpu area. The caller should allocate
> + * all the necessary pages and pass them in @pages.
> + * @populate_pte_fn() is called on each page to be used for percpu
> + * mapping and is responsible for making sure all the necessary page
> + * tables for the page is allocated.
> + *
> + * RETURNS:
> + * The determined PCPU_UNIT_SIZE which can be used to initialize
> + * percpu access.
> + */
> +size_t __init pcpu_setup_static(pcpu_populate_pte_fn_t populate_pte_fn,
> + struct page **pages, size_t cpu_size)
> +{
> + static struct vm_struct static_vm;
> + struct pcpu_chunk *static_chunk;
> + int nr_cpu_pages = DIV_ROUND_UP(cpu_size, PAGE_SIZE);
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + int err, i;
> +
> + while (1 << __pcpu_unit_pages_shift < nr_cpu_pages)
> + __pcpu_unit_pages_shift++;
Is there an ilog2() hiding in there somewhere?
> + pcpu_static_size = cpu_size;
> + __pcpu_unit_pages = 1 << __pcpu_unit_pages_shift;
> + __pcpu_unit_shift = PAGE_SHIFT + __pcpu_unit_pages_shift;
> + __pcpu_unit_size = 1 << __pcpu_unit_shift;
> + __pcpu_chunk_size = num_possible_cpus() * __pcpu_unit_size;
> + __pcpu_nr_slots = pcpu_size_to_slot(__pcpu_unit_size) + 1;
> +
> + /* allocate chunk slots */
> + pcpu_slot = alloc_bootmem(PCPU_NR_SLOTS * sizeof(pcpu_slot[0]));
> + for (i = 0; i < PCPU_NR_SLOTS; i++)
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pcpu_slot[i]);
> +
> + /* init and register vm area */
> + static_vm.flags = VM_ALLOC;
> + static_vm.size = PCPU_CHUNK_SIZE;
> + vm_area_register_early(&static_vm);
> +
> + /* init static_chunk */
> + static_chunk = alloc_bootmem(SIZEOF_STRUCT_PCPU_CHUNK);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&static_chunk->list);
> + static_chunk->vm = &static_vm;
> + static_chunk->free_size = PCPU_UNIT_SIZE - pcpu_static_size;
> + static_chunk->contig_hint = static_chunk->free_size;
> +
> + /* assign pages and map them */
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_cpu_pages; i++) {
> + *pcpu_chunk_pagep(static_chunk, cpu, i) = *pages++;
> + populate_pte_fn(pcpu_chunk_addr(static_chunk, cpu, i));
> + }
> + }
> +
> + err = pcpu_map(static_chunk, 0, nr_cpu_pages);
> + if (err)
> + panic("failed to setup static percpu area, err=%d\n", err);
> +
> + /* link static_chunk in */
> + pcpu_chunk_relocate(static_chunk, -1);
> + pcpu_chunk_addr_insert(static_chunk);
> +
> + /* we're done */
> + pcpu_base_addr = (void *)pcpu_chunk_addr(static_chunk, 0, 0);
> + return PCPU_UNIT_SIZE;
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-19 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-18 12:04 [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] implement dynamic percpu allocator Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 01/10] vmalloc: call flush_cache_vunmap() from unmap_kernel_range() Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 12:06 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-19 22:36 ` David Miller
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 02/10] module: fix out-of-range memory access Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 12:08 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-20 7:16 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 03/10] module: reorder module pcpu related functions Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 04/10] alloc_percpu: change percpu_ptr to per_cpu_ptr Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 05/10] alloc_percpu: add align argument to __alloc_percpu Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 06/10] percpu: kill percpu_alloc() and friends Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 0:17 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-11 18:36 ` Tony Luck
2009-03-11 22:44 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-12 2:06 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 07/10] vmalloc: implement vm_area_register_early() Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 0:55 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 12:09 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 08/10] vmalloc: add un/map_kernel_range_noflush() Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 12:17 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-20 1:27 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 7:15 ` Subject: [PATCH 08/10 UPDATED] " Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 8:32 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-21 3:21 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 09/10] percpu: implement new dynamic percpu allocator Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 10:10 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-02-19 11:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-20 2:45 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 12:07 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-20 2:35 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 3:04 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-20 5:29 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-24 2:52 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-19 11:51 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-20 3:01 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 3:02 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-24 2:56 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-24 5:27 ` [PATCH tj-percpu] percpu: add __read_mostly to variables which are mostly read only Tejun Heo
2009-02-24 5:47 ` [PATCH 09/10] percpu: implement new dynamic percpu allocator Tejun Heo
2009-02-24 17:41 ` Luck, Tony
2009-02-26 3:17 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-27 19:41 ` Luck, Tony
2009-02-19 12:36 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-20 3:04 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 7:30 ` [PATCH UPDATED " Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 8:37 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-21 3:23 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-21 3:42 ` [PATCH tj-percpu] percpu: s/size/bytes/g in new percpu allocator and interface Tejun Heo
2009-02-21 7:48 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-21 7:55 ` [PATCH tj-percpu] percpu: clean up size usage Tejun Heo
2009-02-21 7:56 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 12:04 ` [PATCH 10/10] x86: convert to the new dynamic percpu allocator Tejun Heo
2009-02-18 13:43 ` [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] implement " Ingo Molnar
2009-02-19 0:31 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 10:51 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-19 11:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-19 12:14 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-20 3:08 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 5:36 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 7:33 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 0:30 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-19 11:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-20 3:17 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-20 9:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-21 7:10 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-21 7:33 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-22 19:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-23 0:43 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-23 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-23 13:38 ` [patch] x86: optimize __pa() to be linear again on 64-bit x86 Ingo Molnar
2009-02-23 14:08 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-23 14:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-24 16:00 ` Andi Kleen
2009-02-27 5:57 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-27 6:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-27 7:11 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-22 19:27 ` [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] implement dynamic percpu allocator Ingo Molnar
2009-02-23 0:47 ` Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090219021015.aac6ea43.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cpw@sgi.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.