From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86-64: software IRQ masking and handling
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:32:24 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201007121732.26092.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1278911493.2538.204.camel@edumazet-laptop>
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 02:41:33 pm Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Two changes are possible :
>
> 1) Get rid of the cpu_online_mask (its a const pointer to a known
> target). I cant see a reason for its need it actually...
There was a reason, but I'm trying to remember it.
ISTR, it was to catch direct frobbing of the masks. That was important:
we were converting code everywhere to hand around cpumasks by ptr
rather than by copy. But that semantic change meant that a function which
previously harmlessly frobbed a copy would now frob (say) cpu_online_mask.
However, ((const struct cpumask *)cpu_online_bits)) would work for that
too. (Well, renaming cpu_online_bits to __cpu_online_bits would be better
since it's not non-static).
Ideally, those masks too would be dynamically allocated. But the boot
changes required for that are best left until someone really needs > 64k
CPUs.
> 2) Dont use a the last const qualifier but __read_mostly to move
> cpu_online_mask on same section.
>
> Rusty, could you comment on one or other way before I submit a patch ?
>
> (Of course, possible/present/active have same problem)
Yep. Might want to do a patch to get rid of the remaining 100 references
to cpu_online_map (etc) as well if you're feeling enthusiastic :)
Thanks!
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-12 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-11 18:01 [RFC PATCH] x86-64: software IRQ masking and handling Tejun Heo
2010-07-11 19:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-07-11 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-11 22:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-07-12 1:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-12 5:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-07-12 8:02 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2010-07-12 7:41 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 2:19 ` Rusty Russell
2010-07-12 2:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-12 7:45 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 7:35 ` Tejun Heo
2010-07-12 13:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-08-03 21:37 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-08-04 2:09 ` Rusty Russell
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=201007121732.26092.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.