Re: [PATCH] percpu_counter: Fix __percpu_counter_sum()
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Mon Dec 08 2008 - 18:05:22 EST
On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 18:00 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 11:20:35PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > atomic_t is pretty good on all archs, but you get to keep the cacheline
> > ping-pong.
> >
>
> Stupid question --- if you're worried about cacheline ping-pongs, why
> aren't each cpu's delta counter cacheline aligned? With a 64-byte
> cache-line, and a 32-bit counters entry, with less than 16 CPU's we're
> going to be getting cache ping-pong effects with percpu_counter's,
> right? Or am I missing something?
sorta - a new per-cpu allocator is in the works, but we do cacheline
align the per-cpu allocations (or used to), also, the allocations are
node affine.
--
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/