Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1337688

Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu lookups

From Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu lookups
Date 2016-02-18 21:20 +0100
Message-ID <r3Ddp-2wj-51@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <r3cZz-oW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3f1p-1O1-35@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3fb4-1S3-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3fkL-1Vw-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3fNM-2nq-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Vikas Shivappa wrote:
> 
> Please stop top posting, finally!
> 
> > But we have an extra static - static to avoid having it in the stack..
> 
> It's not about the cpu mask on the stack. The reason was that with cpumask off
> stack cpumask_and_mask() requires an allocation, which then can't be used in
> the starting/dying callbacks.
>  
> Darn, you are right to remind me.
> 
> Now, the proper solution for this stuff is to provide a library function as we
> need that for several drivers. No point to duplicate that functionality. I'll
> cook something up and repost the uncore/cqm set tomorrow.

Second thoughts on that.

cpumask_any_but() is fine as is, if we feed it topology_core_cpumask(cpu). The
worst case search is two bitmap_find_next() if the first search returned cpu.

Now cpumask_any_and() does a search as well, but the number of
bitmap_find_next() invocations is limited to the number of sockets if we feed
the cqm_cpu_mask as first argument. So for 4 or 8 sockets that's still a
reasonable limit. If the people with insane large machines care, we can
revisit that topic. It's still faster than for_each_online_cpu() :)

Thanks,

	tglx

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-02-17 16:50 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-02-17 17:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2016-02-17 17:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@intel.com> - 2016-02-17 19:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-02-17 19:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-02-17 19:40 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@intel.com> - 2016-02-17 19:50 +0100
          Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-02-17 20:20 +0100
            Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-02-18 21:20 +0100
              Re: [PATCH] x86/perf/intel/cqm: Get rid of the silly for_each_cpu  lookups Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@intel.com> - 2016-02-19 00:20 +0100

csiph-web