Re: [RFC][-mm] Simple stats for cpu resource controller v3

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Balaji Rao <balajirrao@...>
Cc: <dhaval@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <containers@...>, <menage@...>, <balbir@...>, <vatsa@...>, <a.p.zijlstra@...>
Date: Thursday, May 1, 2008 - 5:00 pm

On Thu, 1 May 2008 23:11:06 +0530
Balaji Rao <balajirrao@gmail.com> wrote:


Needs a comment, and parentheses?


That's 128 bytes on ia64.


And with NR_CPUS=1024, we're starting to talk serious pigginess.

And there's one of these per task_group!  Chances are we just won't be able
to allocate that much contiguous memory, so that will solve the problem ;)


Ok...


so we could have used plain old spin_lock() here.


That loop iterates 1024 times, under spin_lock_irqsave().  On a 2-way. 
Sad, no?


Rethink, please...

There are numerous reasons here for implementing the counters as
dynamically-allocated, per-online-cpu things, with a cpu-hotplug notifier. 
All a bit of a hassle, but that's life.


Anyway, forget all that.

Did you consider using include/linux/percpu_counter.h?

If so, what was wrong with it?

Because it would be much better to fix per-cpu counters than to invent new
stuff.

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC][-mm] Simple stats for cpu resource controller v3, Andrew Morton, (Thu May 1, 5:00 pm)