Zhang, Xiantao wrote: >>From 697d50286088e98da5ac8653c80aaa96c81abf87 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Xiantao Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:50:24 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] KVM:IA64: Implement smp_call_function_mask for ia64 > > This function provides more flexible interface for smp > infrastructure. > Signed-off-by: Xiantao Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Xiantao, I'm a little wary of the performance impact of this change. Doing a cpumask compare on all smp_call_function calls seems a little expensive. Maybe it's just noise in the big picture compared to the actual cost of the IPIs, but I thought I'd bring it up. Keep in mind that a cpumask can be fairly big these days, max NR_CPUS is currently 4096. For those booting a kernel with NR_CPUS at 4096 on a dual CPU machine, it would be a bit expensive. Why not keep smp_call_function() the way it was before, rather than implementing it via the call to smp_call_function_mask()? Cheers, Jes ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
