On Sat, 16 Sep 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> So I suspect your perf fix is the right one, and maybe we could/should
> >> just make people more aware of the empty cpumask issue with UP.
> >
> > Right, I just got a bit frightened as I really was not aware about that
> > 'opmtimization' which means that so far I just was lucky not to trip over
> > it.
>
> Yeah. I can't say that I was really aware of it either in a every-day
> kind of way, it was only when I looked it up that I went "Oh, right,
> that's what we did".
>
> So it's subtle and unexpected, and the saving grace is basically that
> empty cpumasks are really the exception to begin with. They basically
> don't happen in normal situations.
Yes and no. We get more code which uses cpumasks to store state, just like
I did, and while a lot of the cpumask functions just work as expected a
subset including for_each_cpu does not. That's confusing at best and I
rather avoid the hard to debug issues on UP, which probably gets less
testing anyway.
Thanks,
tglx
