Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1743249 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH/RFC] cpuhp code and data usage on UP systems Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200
| From | Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-10-02 22:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH/RFC] cpuhp code and data usage on UP systems |
| Message-ID | <uwfP7-ur-89@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>
> On !SMP systems, we end up with the following array definition:
>
> static struct cpuhp_step cpuhp_ap_states[] = {
> [CPUHP_ONLINE] = {
> .name = "online",
> .startup.single = NULL,
> .teardown.single = NULL,
> },
> };
>
> where CPUHP_ONLINE = 187. That means up to 99.5% of this array is unused
> but still allocated in the kernel's .data section i.e. 3760 bytes.
>
> The same issue exists with cpuhp_bp_states being 1720 bytes.
>
> The goal of this patch is mainly about illustrating the issue and
> reducing .data usage. I have no clear idea when this stuff is really
> needed besides standard CPU hotplug. Not knowing exactly what I'm doing
> here, I made it conditional on CONFIG_SMP for now. There might be a case
> for moving that code to a separate file (cpuhp.c maybe?) and omitting it
> from the kernel when unneeded.
>
> Comments?
Sure.
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPUHP
> +#define ___P(proto, def_retcode) extern proto;
> +#else
> +#define ___P(proto, def_retcode) static inline proto { return def_retcode }
> +#endif
> +
> +___P(
> int __cpuhp_setup_state(enum cpuhp_state state, const char *name, bool invoke,
> int (*startup)(unsigned int cpu),
> - int (*teardown)(unsigned int cpu), bool multi_instance);
> -
> + int (*teardown)(unsigned int cpu), bool multi_instance), 0; )
What exactly is invoking the callbacks of states in the proper context and
manages instances on registration? Ditto for teardwon in case of modules.
Thanks,
tglx
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web