From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow per-cpu variables to be page-aligned
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:44:16 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1174477457.11680.170.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1ejnjc5qa.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 03:21 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Do we really want to allow modules to be able to allocate page sized
> per cpu memory.
Hi Eric!
They always could, of course, they just wouldn't get correct alignment.
I think the principle of least surprise says that if we support this, it
will also work in modules...
> If my memory servers on how this code works we will wind
> up allocating 1 page of per cpu memory for every module that allocates a
> per cpu variable. 128 bytes sucks 4k is an order of magnitude worse.
Not quite. We allocate a total amount of per-cpu memory at boot, then
anything left over gets used for per-cpu vars in modules.
Looking at the module per-cpu code again, the rounding up of the memory
used by the kernel seems unnecessary though. I'll try ripping that
out...
> On x86_64 we are only reserving 8K for modules...
Really? I can't see that.
It did look like the x86-64 setup_per_cpu_areas should be moved into
common code though (it's numa-aware). Maybe that breaks some platforms.
It means the x86 cpu_pda initialization would have to be done in
smp_prepare_boot_cpu tho...
Cheers!
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-21 11:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-21 6:10 Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 6:30 ` [PATCH 0/4] i386 GDT cleanups Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 6:32 ` [PATCH 1/4] i386 GDT cleanups: Use per-cpu variables for GDT, PDA Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 6:35 ` [PATCH 2/4] i386 GDT cleanups: Use per-cpu GDT immediately upon boot Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 6:36 ` [PATCH 3/4] i386 GDT cleanups: clean up cpu_init() Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 6:53 ` [PATCH 4/4] i386 GDT cleanups: cleanup GDT Access Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 9:31 ` [PATCH 2/4] i386 GDT cleanups: Use per-cpu GDT immediately upon boot Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-21 11:55 ` Rusty Russell
2007-03-21 16:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-21 23:58 ` Rusty Russell
2007-03-22 8:10 ` Sébastien Dugué
2007-03-22 9:24 ` Rusty Russell
2007-03-22 15:59 ` [PATCH] i386 GDT cleanups: Rename boot_gdt_table to boot_gdt Sébastien Dugué
2007-03-23 7:19 ` Rusty Russell
2007-03-23 14:15 ` Andi Kleen
2007-03-21 9:21 ` [PATCH] Allow per-cpu variables to be page-aligned Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-21 11:44 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2007-03-21 16:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-22 0:09 ` 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=1174477457.11680.170.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--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
Powered by JetHome