From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx106.postini.com [74.125.245.106]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 047BE6B0031 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:16:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:16:58 +0000 From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: percpu pages: up batch size to fix arithmetic?? errror In-Reply-To: <523108B7.7050101@sr71.net> Message-ID: <00000141128835e1-8664ca3a-c439-4d9d-89cb-308664595db4-000000@email.amazonses.com> References: <20130911220859.EB8204BB@viggo.jf.intel.com> <5230F7DD.90905@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5230FB0A.70901@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <523108B7.7050101@sr71.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: Cody P Schafer , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 11 Sep 2013, Dave Hansen wrote: > 3. We want ->high to approximate the size of the cache which is > private to a given cpu. But, that's complicated by the L3 caches > and hyperthreading today. well lets keep it well below that. There are other caches (slab related f.e.) that are also in constant use. > I'll take one of my big systems and run it with some various ->high > settings and see if it makes any difference. Do you actually see contention issues on the locks? I think we have a tendency to batch too much in too many caches. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org