Re: [Xen-devel] [RFO] #2: removing a concurrency bottleneck

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20/03/2009 08:30, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It should certainly be num_possible_cpus(), which (hopefully) is identical to
> num_present_cpus() until physical CPU hotplug gets supported, in which
> case some infrastructure will need to be added anyway so that your and
> other code could do such per-CPU allocations on demand.
> 
> Other than Keir suggested, I'd not recommend adding further NR_CPUS
> sized arrays (based mostly on how long it took to mostly (fully?) get rid of
> them in Linux in order to support huge systems) - just use per-CPU pointers
> to dynamically allocated memory.

Oh yes, that's a better idea! Please do that instead.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel