From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch] x86-64 new smp_call_function design
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:50:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080227135041.GC1340@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080227132713.GA13681@elte.hu>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 02:27:13PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > This isn't finished yet, however I'd just like to ask for comments.
>
> looks really interesting!
>
> only one fundamental observation:
>
> > +struct call_data {
> > + spinlock_t lock;
> > + struct list_head list;
> > void (*func) (void *info);
> > void *info;
> > + unsigned int flags;
> > + unsigned int refs;
> > + cpumask_t cpumask;
> > + struct rcu_head rcu_head;
> > };
>
> > +struct call_single_data {
> > + struct list_head list;
> > + void (*func) (void *info);
> > + void *info;
> > + unsigned int flags;
> > +};
>
> the two structures are quite similar in size and role - why not have a
> type field and handle them largely together? I think we should try to
> preserve a single queue and a single vector - that would remove a number
> of ugly special-cases from the patch.
A single queue will kill one of the big fundamental scalability
improvements of the call_single. That's the problem.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-27 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-27 12:42 Nick Piggin
2008-02-27 13:04 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-27 13:07 ` Nick Piggin
2008-02-27 13:33 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-16 14:33 ` Avi Kivity
2008-02-27 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-27 13:50 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2008-02-27 15:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-27 22:14 ` Nick Piggin
2008-02-28 8:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-28 12:55 ` Andi Kleen
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=20080227135041.GC1340@wotan.suse.de \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--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