From: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
davej@codemonkey.org.uk, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPUMASK: proposal for replacing cpumask_t
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:33:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48C8593C.9080801@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080910225345.GL7714@one.firstfloor.org>
Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Here's an initial proposal for abstracting cpumask_t to be either
>
> At least for some cases I don't think you'll get around defining
> a "nearby subset of CPUs that can be handled together" type. Handling 1K
> objects all the time in one piece is simply not a good idea.
>
> -Andi
Every time I stop to think about this, the problems with the cpu
operators come to mind. Should there be a separate set? Or simply
conversion functions to/from a "cpumask_subset" type?
Thanks,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-10 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-06 23:50 [RFC 00/13] smp: reduce stack requirements for genapic send_IPI_mask functions Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 01/13] smp: modify send_IPI_mask interface to accept cpumask_t pointers Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 02/13] cpumask: add for_each_online_cpu_mask_nr function Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 03/13] xen: use new " Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 04/13] cpumask: add cpumask_ptr operations Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 05/13] cpumask: add get_cpumask_var debug operations Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 06/13] genapic: use get_cpumask_var operations for allbutself cpumask_ts Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 07/13] sched: Reduce stack size requirements in kernel/sched.c Mike Travis
2008-09-07 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-07 11:00 ` Andrew Morton
2008-09-07 13:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-08 14:56 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-07 20:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-08 14:54 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-08 15:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-08 18:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-10 22:47 ` [RFC] CPUMASK: proposal for replacing cpumask_t Mike Travis
2008-09-10 22:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-10 23:33 ` Mike Travis [this message]
2008-09-11 5:21 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-11 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-09-11 15:04 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-12 4:55 ` Rusty Russell
2008-09-12 14:28 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-12 22:02 ` Rusty Russell
2008-09-12 22:50 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-12 22:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 08/13] cpufreq: Reduce stack size requirements in acpi-cpufreq.c Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 09/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 1 temp cpumask_ts Mike Travis
2008-09-08 11:01 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-08 16:03 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 10/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 2 internal abi Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 11/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 3 target_cpus Mike Travis
2008-09-07 7:55 ` Bert Wesarg
2008-09-07 9:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-08 15:01 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-08 15:29 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 12/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 4 vector allocation Mike Travis
2008-09-06 23:50 ` [RFC 13/13] genapic: reduce stack pressuge in io_apic.c step 5 cpu_mask_to_apicid Mike Travis
2008-09-07 7:36 ` [RFC 00/13] smp: reduce stack requirements for genapic send_IPI_mask functions Ingo Molnar
2008-09-08 15:17 ` Mike Travis
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=48C8593C.9080801@sgi.com \
--to=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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