From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: davidm@hpl.hp.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] per-cpu change
Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 14:40:57 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030503044617.DE0642C003@lists.samba.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 02 May 2003 09:51:30 MST." <16050.41490.798865.517036@napali.hpl.hp.com>
In message <16050.41490.798865.517036@napali.hpl.hp.com> you write:
> - On NUMA, you want to allocate the per-CPU areas in node-local memory.
Thanks: I'd forgotten about this. Even "big smp" machines often have
different memory latencies.
I need to allow archs to override the core allocation.
> - It's important to initialize the per-CPU area early enough. We
> currently do it in cpu_init(). Anything later would probably break
> things.
Yep, I imagine you'd explicitly call setup_per_cpu_areas() in
cpu_init. (the later call will do nothing).
> I am a little concerned with supporting per-CPU storage in modules.
> What happens if the per-CPU area fills up? With the normal kernel,
> you'll get a link-time error, but with modules, you won't know until
> you try to insert a module.
Yes. In fact, you get a boot error not a link error in my
implementation.
My previous implementation used a linked-list of memory chunks, like
so:
Core kernel percpu First dynamic percpu Second dynamic percpu
+----+----+---...-+ -> +----+----+---...-+ -> +----+----+---...-+ ->
CPU0 CPU1 CPU2...
You can then use the same __per_cpu_offset[], as the spacing between
each cpu's variables in the dynamically allocated sections is the same
as in the core kernel. You can __alloc_percpu any size up to the
initial inter-cpu spacing (which was equal to the initial amount of
static per-cpu data, or 4k, whatever is more).
But if the cpu's variables are not consecutive (ie your NUMA point),
this scheme breaks down: you'd need to allocate areas with the same
spacing between them, which won't happen.
So I think the current, simpler choice is preferable.
> But the alternative of using something similar to the user-level TLS
> model doesn't look exactly attractive either.
Yes, I spoke with Alan Modra about what he had to do on PPC64, and ran
screaming. We can live with more constraints, in the kernel, I think,
especially when the result is so fast and simple.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-03 4:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-02 8:28 Rusty Russell
2003-05-02 16:51 ` David Mosberger
2003-05-03 4:40 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2003-05-03 4:53 ` William Lee Irwin III
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=20030503044617.DE0642C003@lists.samba.org \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=davidm@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®