Re: [02/17][PATCH] Implement smp_call_function_mask for ia64 - V8

[Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxx>]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Jes Sorensen wrote:
> This change has been on the x86 side for ages, and not even Ingo made a 
> peep about it ;)

Mmmm, last time I looked, x86 didn't scale to any interesting number
of CPUs :-)

> > Why not keep smp_call_function() the way it was before, rather than
> > implementing it via the call to smp_call_function_mask()?
>
> Because Xen needs a different core implementation (because of its 
> different IPI implementation), and it would be better to just have to do 
> one of them rather than N.

I wasn't suggesting we shouldn't have both interfaces, merely
questioning why adding what to me seems like an unnecessary performance
hit for the classic case of the call.

Cheers,
Jes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html