From: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kvm: use cpumask_var_t for cpus_hardware_enabled
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 06:29:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <493D2F4D.3090702@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200812082220.42790.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Monday 08 December 2008 20:16:44 Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Rusty Russell wrote:
>>>> This isn't on stack, so it isn't buying us anything.
>>>>
>>> It's the CONFIG_NR_CPUS=4096 but nr_cpu_ids=4 case which we win using
>>> dynamic allocation. Gotta love distribution kernels.
>>>
>>>
>> What does it buy? 4096/8 = 512 bytes statically allocated?
>
> It adds up, and 4096 seems to be only the start of the insanityH^H^Hfun.
The real win though is when cpumask_size represents the actual size of the
cpumask (based on # of possible cpus) instead of the pre-configured size
of NR_CPUS. So for 99.9% of the systems (having 64 or fewer cpus), the
savings will be 504 bytes not allocated.
>
>>> Not quite. If !CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK, cpumask_var_t == cpumask_t[1].
>>> Blame Linus :)
>>>
>> Hm, is there a C trick which will error out when allocating something on
>> the stack, but work when allocating statically? I can think of
>> something to do the reverse, but that doesn't help.
>
> We also need to prevent assignment, eg:
>
> *foo = *bar;
>
> Because when we allocate them, we'll cut them to size.
>
> Cheers,
> Rusty.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-08 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200812072125.45757.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
2008-12-07 15:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] kvm: use cpumask_var_t for cpus_hardware_enabled Avi Kivity
2008-12-08 6:05 ` Rusty Russell
2008-12-08 9:46 ` Avi Kivity
2008-12-08 11:50 ` Rusty Russell
2008-12-08 14:29 ` Mike Travis [this message]
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=493D2F4D.3090702@sgi.com \
--to=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).