Re: [PATCH] percpu: add optimized generic percpu accessors

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Friday 16 January 2009 10:42:00 Herbert Xu wrote:
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Of course.  But do any architectures actually _need_ that for a single 
> > >> read?
> > > 
> > > not for a read i guess - but for the other ops like add/and/or/xor.
> > 
> > One of the things I'd like to see happen with this work is for
> > us to have a cheap per-cpu atomic counter that we can use for
> > SNMP stats.
> > 
> > If we can make the inc/add variants into a single instruction, then it 
> > won't need to disable preemption or interrupts.
> > 
> > So if you could design the API such that we have a variant of add/inc 
> > that automatically disables/enables preemption then we can optimise 
> > that away on x86.
> 
> Yep, already on it.  It's called local_t; that's what it was originally 
> designed for.
> 
> Unfortunately, to use it efficiently, we need large per-cpu areas.

This makes no sense to me at all. Care to explain?

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/