From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-m32r@ml.linux-m32r.org, linux-m32r-ja@ml.linux-m32r.org,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-am33-list@redhat.com,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
dhowells@redhat.com, jejb@parisc-linux.org, linux390@de.ibm.com,
x86@kernel.org, cmetcalf@tilera.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Simplify the Linux kernel by reducing its state space
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 23:32:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120331223200.GA32482@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120331163321.GA15809@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 12:33:21AM +0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Although there have been numerous complaints about the complexity of
> parallel programming (especially over the past 5-10 years), the plain
> truth is that the incremental complexity of parallel programming over
> that of sequential programming is not as large as is commonly believed.
> Despite that you might have heard, the mind-numbing complexity of modern
> computer systems is not due so much to there being multiple CPUs, but
> rather to there being any CPUs at all. In short, for the ultimate in
> computer-system simplicity, the optimal choice is NR_CPUS=0.
>
> This commit therefore limits kernel builds to zero CPUs. This change
> has the beneficial side effect of rendering all kernel bugs harmless.
> Furthermore, this commit enables additional beneficial changes, for
> example, the removal of those parts of the kernel that are not needed
> when there are zero CPUs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Great work, but I don't think you've gone far enough with this.
What would really help is if you could consolidate all these NR_CPUS
definitions into one place so we don't have essentially the same thing
scattered across all these architectures. We're already doing this on
ARM across our platforms, and its about time such an approach was taken
across the entire kernel tree.
It looks like the MIPS solution would be the best one to pick.
Could you rework your patch to do this please?
While you're at it, you might like to consider that having zero CPUs
makes all this architecture support redundant, so maybe you've missed
a trick there - according to my count, we could get rid of almost 3
million lines of code from arch. We could replace all that with a
single standard implementation.
Bah, maybe I shouldn't have pushed that bpf_jit code for ARM after all...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-31 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-31 16:33 [PATCH RFC] Simplify the Linux kernel by reducing its state space Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-31 16:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-03-31 16:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-31 19:57 ` Linas Vepstas
2012-03-31 20:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-31 20:15 ` Linas Vepstas
2012-03-31 20:25 ` Randy Dunlap
2012-03-31 20:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-31 21:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-03-31 21:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-31 22:19 ` Lorenz Kolb
2012-03-31 22:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-03-31 22:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2012-04-01 1:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-01 17:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-04-01 18:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-01 10:04 ` Borislav Petkov
2012-04-01 18:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20120331223200.GA32482@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jejb@parisc-linux.org \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-am33-list@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m32r-ja@ml.linux-m32r.org \
--cc=linux-m32r@ml.linux-m32r.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.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 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).