Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Dec 2003 19:18:35 -0800 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] another minor bit of cpumask cleanup |
| |
> thanks for reviewing!
My pleasure.
> Maybe Dave will be convinced: he's dogmatic, but rarely unreasonable.
On the third hand, it would be unreasonable of me to expect Dave to agree to shoot his products performance in the foot for the sake of my "more refined" coding style sensibilities.
> I think we'll only be able to tell with the patch in front of us.
I could publish an early version of it now, but I am supposed to be on vacation now with my family, so should avoid starting a discussion that I shouldn't participate in.
> Someday someone will enable VOYAGER_DEBUG and they'll fix it.
yup
> In 2.7, my aim is to switch the rest of them, move more things to > per-cpu rather than [NR_CPUS] arrays, add the more efficient dynamic > per-cpu allocation, and spread the per-cpu religion by fire and the > sword.
For folks doing really large cpu counts, like my employer, this might become of interest sooner. On the other hand, we do really large memory as well, so this might not be especially critical to us.
If NR_CPUS arrays start to annoy us sooner, I'll know where to consult.
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |