Re: [02/17][PATCH] Implement smp_call_function_mask for ia64 - V8

Jes Sorensen
2008-04-01T08:34:57Z

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Jes Sorensen wrote:
> This change has been on the x86 side for ages, and not even Ingo made a
> peep about it ;)

Mmmm, last time I looked, x86 didn't scale to any interesting number
of CPUs :-)

>> Why not keep smp_call_function() the way it was before, rather than
>> implementing it via the call to smp_call_function_mask()?
>
> Because Xen needs a different core implementation (because of its
> different IPI implementation), and it would be better to just have to do
> one of them rather than N.

I wasn't suggesting we shouldn't have both interfaces, merely
questioning why adding what to me seems like an unnecessary performance
hit for the classic case of the call.

Cheers,
Jes