Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932934AbbHZK1o (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 26 Aug 2015 06:27:44 -0400
Received: from e28smtp06.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.6]:46839 "EHLO
	e28smtp06.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756072AbbHZK1m (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 26 Aug 2015 06:27:42 -0400
X-Helo: d28dlp01.in.ibm.com
X-MailFrom: raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
X-RcptTo: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <55DD9401.9090809@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 15:55:05 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
CC: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org,
        kaber@trash.net, jiri@resnulli.us, edumazet@google.com,
        hannes@stressinduktion.org, tom@herbertland.com, azhou@nicira.com,
        ebiederm@xmission.com, ipm@chirality.org.uk, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        anton@au1.ibm.com, nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Optimize the snmp stat aggregation for large
 cpus
References: <y> <1440489266-31127-1-git-send-email-raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150825.160730.1747721171751442778.davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20150825.160730.1747721171751442778.davem@davemloft.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 15082610-0021-0000-0000-00000707F65D
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1322
Lines: 39

On 08/26/2015 04:37 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:24:24 +0530
>
>> Please let me know if you have suggestions/comments.
>
> Like Eric Dumazet said the idea is good but needs some adjustments.
>
> You might want to see whether a per-cpu work buffer works for this.

sure, Let me know if I understood correctly,

we allocate the temp buffer,
we will have a  "add_this_cpu_data" function and do

for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
                 smp_call_function_single(cpu, add_this_cpu_data, buffer, 1)

if not could you please point to an example you had in mind.

>
> It's extremely unfortunately that we can't depend upon the destination
> buffer being properly aligned, because we wouldn't need a temporary
> scratch area if it were aligned properly.

True, But I think for 64 bit cpus when (pad == 0) we can go ahead and
use stats array directly and get rid of put_unaligned(). is it correct?

(my internal initial patch had this version but thought it is ugly to
have ifdef BITS_PER_LONG==64)




--
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/