From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au
Cc: travis@sgi.com, mingo@elte.hu, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
steiner@sgi.com, jes@sgi.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] smp: reduce stack requirements for smp_call_function_mask
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 12:51:53 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080908.125153.263452187.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200809082030.41987.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:30:41 +1000
> Is that being tried? Setting it to 8192 or even higher during QA seems
> like a good idea to me.
This is a great idea, especially since it will make it even more
painfully obvious that essentially any function local cpumask_t
variable is a bug.
Really, it seems sensible to do something like:
1) Make cpumask_t a pointer.
2) Add cpumask_data_t which is what cpumask_t is now. This gets
used when for the actual storage, and will only get applied to
datastructures that are dynamically allocated. For example, for
the cpu_vm_mask in mm_struct.
3) Type make and fix build failures until they are all gone.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-08 19:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-05 21:40 Mike Travis
2008-09-05 21:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Mike Travis
2008-09-05 21:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: reduce stack requirements for send_call_func_ipi Mike Travis
2008-09-05 21:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: restore 4096 limit for NR_CPUS Mike Travis
2008-09-06 13:29 ` [PATCH 0/3] smp: reduce stack requirements for smp_call_function_mask Ingo Molnar
2008-09-06 18:12 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-06 18:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-08 10:30 ` Nick Piggin
2008-09-08 15:47 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-08 19:51 ` David Miller [this message]
2008-09-08 20:11 ` Mike Travis
2008-09-08 20:48 ` David Miller
2008-09-08 9:48 ` Jes Sorensen
2008-09-08 15:41 ` Mike Travis
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=20080908.125153.263452187.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
/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