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

Jes Sorensen jes at sgi.com
Tue Apr 1 01:34:57 PDT 2008


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


More information about the Virtualization mailing list