From: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] cpus4096 tree, part 3
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:28:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49603AE4.80809@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200901041405.15096.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Sunday 04 January 2009 07:26:03 Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Sat, 3 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>> Has anybody looked at what the stack size is with MAXSMP set with an
>>>> allyesconfig? And what areas are still problematic, if any? Are we going
>>>> to have some code-paths that still essentially have 1kB+ of stack space
>>>> just because they haven't been converted and still have the cpu mask on
>>>> stack?
>>> ok, indeed testing of that is in order now.
>> Well, since I can compile a allyesconfig pretty quickly, I did the static
>> part. It looks better than it used to, and I think most of the huge stacks
>> are totally unrealted to cpu masks. But not all.
>>
>> But it looks like we have a few:
>>
>> - flush_tlb_current_task:
>> cpumask_t cpu_mask;
>> - flush_tlb_mm:
>> cpumask_t cpu_mask;
> ...
>> - acpi_cpufreq_target:
>> cpumask_t online_policy_cpus
>
> Mike? These are x86-specific...
I've been testing the heck out of it... ;-)
>
>> - local_cpus_show:
>> cpumask_t mask;
>> - local_cpulist_show:
>> cpumask_t mask;
Yes, these are in my "real soon now" patchset. Trivial.
>
> Yes, this removal is still in my queue. I'll double-check that all the
> archs have the new "cpumask_of_pcibus". (cpumask:replace-and-remove-pcibus_to_cpumask.patch "cpumask: remove the now-obsoleted pcibus_to_cpumask()").
>
>> and then we have a number of things that have "struct cpufreq_policy" on
>> the stack, and those things have two cpumask_t's in each.
>
> Yep, we have the conversion for that too. Mike, it's cpumask:convert-drivers_acpi.patch "cpumask: convert struct cpufreq_policy to cpumask_var_t."
>
That's part of what I'm testing above.
>> The rest of the high-stack-usage cases - from a _very_ quick look - seem
>> to be unrelated to CPU masks, but in the "more than 1kB of stack" group
>> about a third (wild handwaving eyeballing) of them do seem to be related
>> to cpumask.
>
> Mike was tracking this; I think he has a script to set NR_CPUS small then
> large and dump the changes.
It's looking pretty good, only 11 > 1k and 19 more > 512.
Thanks,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-04 4:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-01 1:19 [PULL] cpumask tree Rusty Russell
2009-01-02 20:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-02 20:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-02 23:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 19:38 ` [git pull] cpus4096 tree, part 3 Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 20:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 20:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 21:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-04 3:35 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-04 4:28 ` Mike Travis [this message]
2009-01-03 21:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 22:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-03 22:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-05 1:14 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-05 1:16 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-26 19:00 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-26 19:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-26 19:30 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-26 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-26 20:44 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <604427e00901261312w23a1f0f5y61fc5c6cc70297fb@mail.gmail.com>
2009-01-26 23:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-26 23:44 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-07 17:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 20:58 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 7:20 ` [PULL] cpumask tree Rusty Russell
2009-01-03 10:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 11:59 ` [PATCH] ia64: cpumask fix for is_affinity_mask_valid() Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 12:19 ` [PATCH] cpumask: convert RCU implementations, fix Ingo Molnar
2009-01-04 3:43 ` [PATCH] ia64: cpumask fix for is_affinity_mask_valid() Rusty Russell
2009-01-04 4:20 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-04 12:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 14:58 ` [PULL] cpumask tree Mike Travis
2009-01-03 15:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 15:31 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 15:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 15:52 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 16:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 16:09 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 16:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 16:48 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 17:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 18:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 18:14 ` Mike Travis
2009-01-03 0:23 ` Rusty Russell
2009-01-08 19:10 ` David Daney
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=49603AE4.80809@sgi.com \
--to=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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