Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756512AbZADE2d (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2009 23:28:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752019AbZADE2Y (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2009 23:28:24 -0500 Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.179.29]:57913 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751954AbZADE2Y (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2009 23:28:24 -0500 Message-ID: <49603AE4.80809@sgi.com> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:28:20 -0800 From: Mike Travis User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rusty Russell CC: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [git pull] cpus4096 tree, part 3 References: <200901011149.18401.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20090103203621.GA2491@elte.hu> <200901041405.15096.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200901041405.15096.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2380 Lines: 62 Rusty Russell wrote: > On Sunday 04 January 2009 07:26:03 Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Sat, 3 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>>> Has anybody looked at what the stack size is with MAXSMP set with an >>>> allyesconfig? And what areas are still problematic, if any? Are we going >>>> to have some code-paths that still essentially have 1kB+ of stack space >>>> just because they haven't been converted and still have the cpu mask on >>>> stack? >>> ok, indeed testing of that is in order now. >> Well, since I can compile a allyesconfig pretty quickly, I did the static >> part. It looks better than it used to, and I think most of the huge stacks >> are totally unrealted to cpu masks. But not all. >> >> But it looks like we have a few: >> >> - flush_tlb_current_task: >> cpumask_t cpu_mask; >> - flush_tlb_mm: >> cpumask_t cpu_mask; > ... >> - acpi_cpufreq_target: >> cpumask_t online_policy_cpus > > Mike? These are x86-specific... I've been testing the heck out of it... ;-) > >> - local_cpus_show: >> cpumask_t mask; >> - local_cpulist_show: >> cpumask_t mask; Yes, these are in my "real soon now" patchset. Trivial. > > Yes, this removal is still in my queue. I'll double-check that all the > archs have the new "cpumask_of_pcibus". (cpumask:replace-and-remove-pcibus_to_cpumask.patch "cpumask: remove the now-obsoleted pcibus_to_cpumask()"). > >> and then we have a number of things that have "struct cpufreq_policy" on >> the stack, and those things have two cpumask_t's in each. > > Yep, we have the conversion for that too. Mike, it's cpumask:convert-drivers_acpi.patch "cpumask: convert struct cpufreq_policy to cpumask_var_t." > That's part of what I'm testing above. >> The rest of the high-stack-usage cases - from a _very_ quick look - seem >> to be unrelated to CPU masks, but in the "more than 1kB of stack" group >> about a third (wild handwaving eyeballing) of them do seem to be related >> to cpumask. > > Mike was tracking this; I think he has a script to set NR_CPUS small then > large and dump the changes. It's looking pretty good, only 11 > 1k and 19 more > 512. Thanks, Mike -- 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/