Re: [PATCH 4/4] ring-buffer: only allocate buffers for online cpus

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > I don't like this patch.
> > your [1/4] and [2/4] already solve Pierre's problem.
> > 
> > using online cpu (not possible cpu) increase performance overhead 
> > and messiness.
> > but nobody get benefit ;)
> 
> Well, the fact that you can have 15 buffers for non existent CPUs is a big 
> benefit. And the overhead was only on the read side, not the write, and 
> very limited in overhead for that matter.
> 
> But, looking at this, I realized I can get rid of all the 
> "get_online_cpus". I originally had the CPU_DOWN_PREPARE remove the 
> buffer. But I found it highly annoying during tests, that I lose my data 
> when I brought down a CPU. Thus, I removed the code to free the buffer and 
> replaced it with the comment explaining this.
> 
> The get_online_cpus is to prevent the race where we might remove a buffer. 
> But since we do not do that anymore, those get_online_cpus are pretty 
> useless.
> 
> I'll update the code in a bit.

Great!

from mission critical area view, CPU down event is very important.
I don't hope to lost trace data of downed cpu.
and no get_online_cpus() don't cause annoy overhead.

I love to see your next patch :)


--
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/