From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>,
David.Mosberger@acm.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
"Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Add prefetch switch stack hook in scheduler function
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 20:29:20 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42E8B380.1070003@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050728100429.GA27030@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
[...]
> prefetch_area(void *first_addr, void *last_addr)
>
> (or as addr,len)
>
Yep. We have prefetch_range.
>>
>>Yeah, then a specific field _within_ next->mm or thread_info may want
>>to be fetched. In short, I don't see any argument why we shouldn't
>>call the function prefetch_task().
>
>
> it's a fundamental thing: we _dont_ want to push generic code into
> architectures, and there's nothing per-arch about next->mm.
>
Yeah, I mean within mm, ie. prefetch(&mm->random_cacheline).
>>Secondly, I don't really like your prefetch(kernel_stack()) function
>>because it doesn't really give architectures enough control over
>>exactly what cachelines they get in memory.
>
>
> my point is, it comes down to concrete examples, it may or may not make
> sense to do things per-arch.
>
I thought the concrete example there was ia64's switch_stack,
which looks to be over half a K... oh I see you've asked Ken
whether this will be sufficient. OK in that case let's wait and
see.
>
>>[...] I see nothing wrong with having a prefetch_task() call.
>>(Although I agree things like thread_info->flags and next->mm can be
>>done in generic code).
>
>
> great that we now agree wrt. thread_info and next->mm. My remaining
> point is, once we prefetch ->thread_info, ->mm and the kernel stack,
> nothing else significant remains! (It's still very much possible that
> something needs to be prefetched per-arch, but i'd like to see a robust
> case be made for it, instead of your global 'it might happen' argument.)
>
Well to be clear, I think we have always agreed, except that I
thought it 'did happen' with the ia64 example. If it turns out
that your prefetch is good enough then I will have been mistaken.
Actually to be even clearer, I was never really arguing about what
to prefetch or whether to prefetch from arch code or not. Just that
the name, if any, should be prefetch_task as opposed to
prefetch_stack :)
Nick
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-28 10:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-27 22:07 Add prefetch switch stack hook in scheduler function Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-27 23:13 ` Andrew Morton
2005-07-27 23:23 ` david mosberger
2005-07-28 7:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 8:09 ` Keith Owens
2005-07-28 8:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 9:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 19:14 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 7:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 7:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 8:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2005-07-29 8:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-31 16:27 ` hashed spinlocks Daniel Walker
2005-07-31 18:46 ` David S. Miller
2005-07-31 19:06 ` Daniel Walker
2005-07-31 19:11 ` David S. Miller
2005-07-31 19:16 ` Daniel Walker
2005-07-29 8:30 ` Add prefetch switch stack hook in scheduler function Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 8:39 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2005-07-29 10:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 7:22 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 7:45 ` Keith Owens
2005-07-29 8:02 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 8:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 9:02 ` Russell King
2005-07-29 9:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 7:38 ` Keith Owens
2005-07-29 8:08 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-28 8:31 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-28 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 8:48 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-28 9:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 9:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 9:34 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-28 10:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-28 10:29 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-07-29 15:18 linux
2005-07-29 15:49 ` Ingo Molnar
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=42E8B380.1070003@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=David.Mosberger@acm.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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