On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:24:35 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote:

On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, travis@sgi.com wrote:

quoted

Previous Intro:

Thanks for doing this.

quoted

In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are sized
using NR_CPUS lay in local memory on node 0.  Not only will most
(99%?) of the systems not use all the slots in these arrays,
particularly when NR_CPUS is increased to accommodate future
very high cpu count systems, but a number of cache lines are
passed unnecessarily on the system bus when these arrays are
referenced by cpus on other nodes.

Can we move cpuinfo_x86 also to per cpu area? Though critical run

I worry how much impact that would be? boot_cpu_data is quite 
widely used. 

quoted

Wonder if this confusion is the reason for git commit f3fa8ebc

What git commit (full id) ? 

Looks like it's
commit f3fa8ebc25129bb69929e20b0c84049c39029d8d
Author: Rohit Seth [off-list ref]
Date:   Mon Jun 26 13:58:17 2006 +0200

    [PATCH] x86_64: moving phys_proc_id and cpu_core_id to cpuinfo_x86

---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>