From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>, Jan Glauber <glauber@gmx.de>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [Patch] SMP call function cleanup
Date: 22 Apr 2004 09:46:16 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1082641576.1714.36.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040422132443.GV743@holomorphy.com>
On Thu, 2004-04-22 at 09:24, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> Well, at the moment, anyone in need of IPI'ing > 1 cpu is IPI'ing all,
> which is not swift, so bear that in mind. Though given on_one_cpu(), I
> suppose they can do:
>
> for_each_cpu_mask(cpu, foo->mask)
> on_one_cpu(cpu, bar, ...);
>
> which more or less avoids IPI'ing 1024 cpus to run a function on 2 or
> whatever they were going on about, so they can likely code it that way.
But the key is 'anyone in need of'. What I'd like is for you to
demonstrate a need of execute on cpumask before it gets added to the
API. Murphy's law says that when given a choice people invariably make
the wrong one, so lets not introduce choice into the api unless it's
absolutely necessary.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-22 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-22 12:21 [Patch] SMP call function cleanup Jan Glauber
2004-04-22 12:28 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-04-22 12:37 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-04-22 12:49 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-04-22 12:59 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-22 13:24 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-04-22 13:46 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2004-04-22 14:06 ` William Lee Irwin III
[not found] ` <1082641822.1329.45.camel@halo>
[not found] ` <1082642332.1778.39.camel@mulgrave>
2004-04-22 14:15 ` Jan Glauber
2004-04-23 0:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-04-23 0:21 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-04-23 0:32 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-04-22 13:58 ` Jan Glauber
2004-04-22 12:33 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-04-22 14:00 ` Jan Glauber
2004-04-22 14:13 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-04-23 0:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-04-23 23:38 ` David S. Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-23 6:46 Martin Schwidefsky
2004-04-23 6:53 Martin Schwidefsky
2004-04-23 7:05 ` Anton Blanchard
2004-04-23 9:00 ` Russell King
2004-04-23 7:46 Martin Schwidefsky
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=1082641576.1714.36.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=glauber@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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