From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: per-cpu stats in block device: overkill?
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:55:54 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <494EF3AA.9040100@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200812221049.43884.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Hello, Rusty.
Rusty Russell wrote:
> Hi Jens, Tejun, Jerome,
>
> I've been auditing alloc_per_cpu users, and got to genhd. The code
> is fairly complex, but I can't help wondering if per-cpu counters
> are overkill. After all, we have a single queue lock.
Yeah, maybe.
> The reason I care is that I'm changing alloc_per_cpu to use the
> static per-cpu area: at 40/80 bytes (32/64 bit) per stat, we'd be
> restricted to a few hundred disks unless the percpu area is enlarged
> (in current patches, a cmdline param). Or, I can change genhd to
> use big_percpu_alloc which will use the current inefficient dynamic
> per-cpu system until we get dynamic per-cpu regions (if ever).
I'm working on local counter (local_t) allocator which is used to
replace percpu allocation in percpu_counter and used as basis for
percpu_ref which replaces module ref counting and will be used to
simplify block/char lifetime rules.
The local counter allocator allocates per-cpu pages and the space
overhead is minimal. If per-cpu stats in genhd is necessary, I think
converting it to percpu local counter allocation should do it.
BTW, why make percpu area static?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-22 1:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-22 0:19 per-cpu stats in block device: overkill? Rusty Russell
2008-12-22 1:55 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2008-12-22 3:56 ` Rusty Russell
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=494EF3AA.9040100@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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