Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC] [PATCH] Scalable Statistics Counters

Jack Steiner (steiner@sgi.com)
Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:34:43 -0600 (CST)

>
> I think Jack got his attribution wrong. Which is good for me,
> since I wrote what Jack just gently demolished <grin>.

And I probably should not have been reading mail while I
debugged a weird system hang. :-) I missed the earlier
part of the thread - I though you were refering to local
allocation.

I dont think I have a strong opinion yet about kmem_cache_alloc_node()
vs kmem_cache_alloc_cpu(). I would not be surprised to find that
both interfaces make sense.

If code want to allocate close to a cpu, then kmem_cache_alloc_cpu()
is the best choice. However, I would also expect that some code
already knows the node. Then kmem_cache_alloc_node() is best.

Conversion of cpu->node is easy. Conversion of node->cpu
is slightly more difficult (currently) and has the ambiguity
that there may be multiple cpus on the node - which one should
you select? And does it matter?

As precident, the page allocation routines are all node-based.
(ie., alloc_pages_node(), etc...)

-- 
Thanks


Jack Steiner    (651-683-5302)   (vnet 233-5302)      steiner@sgi.com


-
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/