Re: [PATCH 2/2] hw_breakpoint: Introduce "struct bp_cpuinfo"
From: Frederic Weisbecker
Date: Tue Jun 18 2013 - 13:01:57 EST
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 04:42:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 06/18, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 09:50:57PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > This patch simply moves all per-cpu variables into the new single
> > > per-cpu "struct bp_cpuinfo".
> > >
> > > To me this looks more logical and clean, but this can also simplify
> > > the further potential changes. In particular, I do not think this
> > > memory should be per-cpu, it is never used "locally". After this
> > > change it is trivial to turn it into, say, bootmem[nr_cpu_ids].
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > I'm ok with the patch because it's indeed more logical and clean to pack the info
> > to a single struct.
> > But I'm not sure why you think using per-cpu is a problem. It's not only
> > deemed for optimized local uses,
> But it is.
> Simplest example,
> total_count = per_cpu(per_cpu_count, cpu);
> Every per_cpu() likely means the cache miss. Not to mention we need the
> additional math to calculate the address of the local counter.
> total_count = bootmem_or_kmalloc_array[cpu];
> is much better in this respect.
> And note also that per_cpu_count above can share the cacheline with
> another "hot" per-cpu variable.
Ah I see, that's good to know.
But these variables are supposed to only be touched from slow path
(perf events syscall, ptrace breakpoints creation, etc...), right?
So this is probably not a problem?
> > it's also convenient for allocations and
> > de-allocation, or static definitions.
> Yes, this is advantage. But afaics the only one.
> > I'm not sure why bootmem would make
> > more sense.
> Or kcalloc(nr_cpu_ids), I didn't really mean that alloc_bootmem() is
> necessarily the best option.
Well if there are any real performance issue I don't mind using arrays
> > Other than this in the changelog, the patch is nice, thanks!
> > Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx>
> Thanks ;)
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/