On Feb 18, 2008 4:23 AM, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > we don't need copy too. already have x86_cpu_to_node_map
>
> That's a regression (probably from Mike's patches?). Until recently it was
> used.
>
> The reason the node number was put in there is that it generates far
> shorter code to just fetch the local node number from the PDA than to
> first go through a array lookup from the cpu number. It also saves a
> costly cache line miss on the array if you're unlucky.
>
> It is far better to fix it than to remove it.
>
> I know Mike/Christoph want to get rid of the PDA and make per cpu data
> as efficient as the PDA. If that happens the right fix is to create
> a new per CPU data variable for the node number again.
>
> Here's a quick patch (tested on kvm with numa emulation only)
>
> It should be ok because PDA is set up early and
> the early node is always 0 and there is a 0 in there
> at early boot.
>
> Saves about 1.6k of text on a vmlinux here.
that is because of the inline...
static inline int early_cpu_to_node(int cpu)
{
int *cpu_to_node_map = x86_cpu_to_node_map_early_ptr;
if (cpu_to_node_map)
return cpu_to_node_map[cpu];
else if (per_cpu_offset(cpu))
return per_cpu(x86_cpu_to_node_map, cpu);
else
return NUMA_NO_NODE;
}
should use per_cpu(x86_cpu_to_node_map, cpu) instead.
and limited using early_cpu_to_node etc.
YH
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
