Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 3 Apr 2018 07:52:25 +0200
From:   Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
        heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] softirq: Remove __ARCH_SET_SOFTIRQ_PENDING
In-Reply-To: <20180329180836.GS4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1522290425-22844-1-git-send-email-frederic@kernel.org>
        <1522290425-22844-11-git-send-email-frederic@kernel.org>
        <20180329071619.GO4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
        <20180329134745.GA12958@lerouge>
        <20180329140111.GC4043@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
        <20180329140748.GB12958@lerouge>
        <20180329165343.39f4486f@mschwideX1>
        <20180329180836.GS4082@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20180403075225.69ad3d25@mschwideX1>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 20:08:36 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 04:53:43PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > The lowcore optimization for softirq_pending field is not really needed,
> > just nice to have. But if there is a strong reason to make a common
> > definition for it we can certainly do that.  
> 
> A slightly related question; would it make sense to move all kernel
> static per-cpu stuff into lowcore, or is that asking for too much
> trickery?
 
The space in lowcore is quite limited, for zArch the structure is 8K with
many pre-defined fields. I fear that putting all of the static per-cpu
stuff in there is too much. 

So far I used the lowcore as optimization for selected per-cpu fields
which are performance relevant.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.