From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yk0-f182.google.com (mail-yk0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E1AB9003C7 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:32:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ykax123 with SMTP id x123so538874yka.1 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 11:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x231.google.com (mail-yk0-x231.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4002:c07::231]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v6si3481231ykc.166.2015.07.23.11.32.31 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Jul 2015 11:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ykfw194 with SMTP id w194so592256ykf.0 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 11:32:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:32:28 -0400 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Make cpuid <-> nodeid mapping persistent. Message-ID: <20150723183228.GR15934@mtj.duckdns.org> References: <1436261425-29881-1-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <20150715221345.GO15934@mtj.duckdns.org> <55B07145.5010404@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55B07145.5010404@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tang Chen Cc: mingo@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, hpa@zytor.com, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, yasu.isimatu@gmail.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com, gongzhaogang@inspur.com, qiaonuohan@cn.fujitsu.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Hello, Tang. On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:44:53PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote: > Allocating cpuid when a new cpu comes up and reusing the cpuid when it > comes up again is possible. But I'm not quite sure if it will be less > modification > because we still need an array or bit map or something to keep the mapping, > and select backup nodes for cpus on memory-less nodes when allocating > memory. > > I can post a set of patches for this idea. And then we can see which one is > better. I suspect the difference could be that in the current code the users (workqueue) can remain the same while if we do it lazily there probably needs to be a way to poke it. As long as the IDs are allocated to the online CPUs first, I think pre-allocating everything should be fine too. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org