public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.5isms
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 10:13:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1acrt7bqy.fsf@muc.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41D60C35.9000503@yahoo.com.au> (Nick Piggin's message of "Sat, 01 Jan 2005 13:34:29 +1100")

Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> writes:

> Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> Hi all, I have more 2.5isms for the list.  ./fs/binfmt_elf.c:
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_X86_HT
>>                   /*
>>                    * In some cases (e.g. Hyper-Threading), we want to avoid L1
>>                    * evictions by the processes running on the same package. One
>>                    * thing we can do is to shuffle the initial stack for them.
>>                    *
>>                    * The conditionals here are unneeded, but kept in to make the
>>                    * code behaviour the same as pre change unless we have
>>                    * hyperthreaded processors. This should be cleaned up
>>                    * before 2.6
>>                    */
>>                   if (smp_num_siblings > 1)
>>                           STACK_ALLOC(p, ((current->pid % 64) << 7));
>>   #endif
>>
>
> Can we just kill it? Or do it unconditionally? Or maybe better yet, wrap
> it properly in arch code?

You can't kill it without ruining performance on older HT CPUs.
I would just keep it, it fixes the problem perhaps with a small amount of 
code. A more generalized #ifdef may be a good idea (NEED_STACK_RANDOM)
may be a good idea, but it is not really a pressing need. Enabling 
it unconditionally may be an option, although it will make it harder
to repeat test runs on non hyperthreaded CPUs.

-Andi


  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-01-01  9:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-12-31 23:06 2.5isms Justin Pryzby
2005-01-01  2:34 ` 2.5isms Nick Piggin
2005-01-01  8:40   ` 2.5isms Arjan van de Ven
2005-01-01  9:13   ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-01-02  0:43     ` 2.5isms Nick Piggin
2005-01-02  8:58       ` 2.5isms Arjan van de Ven
2005-01-03  0:49         ` 2.5isms Nick Piggin
2005-01-02 12:04       ` 2.5isms Andi Kleen
2005-01-03  0:44         ` 2.5isms Nick Piggin
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-03 20:01 "Will be removed in 2.4" Justin Pryzby
2003-12-30 21:30 ` 2.5isms Justin Pryzby
2004-01-03 15:18   ` 2.5isms Pavel Machek
2004-01-07  7:28   ` 2.5isms Justin Pryzby
2004-03-29 15:40   ` 2.5isms Pavel Machek

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=m1acrt7bqy.fsf@muc.de \
    --to=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.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