From: Erich F. <ef...@es...> - 2002-12-18 17:04:01
|
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 15:44, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 04:40:43PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 05:30:50PM +0100, Erich Focht wrote: > > > :-( I find it ugly as a separately configurable thing. Otherwise it= is > > > > > > just a normal monitoring feature which we had long time before > > > starting to talk about NUMA. Eliminating this feature saves 16 byte= s > > > in the task-struct for 2 CPU boxes, GREAT!!! > > > > Redo it using the per-cpu slab allocator? =2E.. > > This is all theory (maybe wrong theory) .. but I can make a patch for > these stats to use kmalloc_percpu if ppl are interested... It makes sense to have a new patch if there is a realistic chance to get it accepted. Andrew??? If not, we probably can live with the additional patch which just reverts the lost functionality (and without CONFIG_*). My opinion... Others? Regards, Erich |