Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

[Ingo Molnar]

* Mike Travis <travis@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > This fragility makes me very nervous.  It seems hard enough to get 
> > this stuff working with current tools; making it work over the whole 
> > range of supported tools looks like its going to be hard.
> 
> (me too ;-)
> 
> Once I get a solid version working with (at least) gcc-4.2.4, then 
> regression testing with older tools will be easier, or at least a 
> table of results can be produced.

the problem is, we cannot just put it even into tip/master if there's no 
short-term hope of fixing a problem it triggers. gcc-4.2.3 is solid for 
me otherwise, for series of thousands of randomly built kernels.

can we just leave out the zero-based percpu stuff safely and could i 
test the rest of your series - or are there dependencies? I think 
zero-based percpu, while nice in theory, is probably just a very small 
positive effect so it's not a life or death issue. (or is there any 
deeper, semantic reason why we'd want it?)

	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/