Hello, On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 01:32:52PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > Yes, I think it will be more efficient to use percpu_counter in this case. > The preempt_disable/enable() calls are pretty cheap. Once in a while, you > need to take the lock and update the global count. How about I change the > 2nd patch to use percpu_counter internally when 64-bit counts are needed in > 32-bit archs, but use the regular percpu counts on 64-bit archs? If you are > OK with that, I can update the patch accordingly.
Does having percpu_stats as a separate construct make sense after that? Just use percpu_counter directly? You end up wasting a bit more space that way but most of space overhead for these things are in percpu part anyway, so in proportion it shouldn't make that much of a difference. Thanks. -- tejun
