linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rfc] increase struct page size?!
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 11:25:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070520092552.GA7318@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070520084647.GF19966@holomorphy.com>

On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 01:46:47AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 11:15:01AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> The cache cost argument is specious. Even misaligned, smaller is
> >> smaller.
> 
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 07:22:29AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Of course smaller is smaller ;) Why would that make the cache cost
> > argument specious?
> 
> It's not possible to ignore aggregation. For instance, for a subset
> of mem_map whose size ignoring alignment would otherwise fit in the
> cache to completely avoid sharing any cachelines between page
> structures requires page structures to be separated by at least one
> mem_map index. This is highly unlikely in uniform distributions.

But that wasn't my argument. I _know_ there are cases where the smaller
struct would be better, and I'm sure they would even arise in a running
kernel.
 

> On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 11:15:01AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> The cache footprint reduction is merely amortized,
> >> probabilistic, etc.
> 
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 07:22:29AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > I don't really know what you mean by this, or what part of my cache cost
> > argument you disagree with...
> > I think it is that you could construct mem_map access patterns, without
> > specifically looking at alignment, where a 56 byte struct page would suffer
> > about 75% more cache misses than a 64 byte aligned one (and you could also
> > get about 12% fewer cache misses with other access patterns).
> > I also think the kernel's mem_map access patterns would be more on the
> > random side, so overall would result in significantly fewer cache misses
> > with 64 byte aligned pages.
> > Which part do you disagree with?
> 
> The lack of consideration of the average case. I'll see what I can smoke
> out there.

I _am_ considering the average case, and I consider the aligned structure
is likely to win on average :) I just don't have numbers for it yet.


--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-20  9:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-18  4:08 Nick Piggin
2007-05-18  4:47 ` David Miller, Nick Piggin
2007-05-18  5:12   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-18  5:22     ` David Miller, Nick Piggin
2007-05-18  5:31       ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-18 18:15     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-18  7:19 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-18  7:32   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-18  7:43     ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-18  7:59       ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-18  9:42 ` David Howells
2007-05-19  1:30   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-18 12:06 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-18 15:42 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-19  1:22   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-19 17:53   ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-20 22:50     ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-18 18:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-18 20:37   ` Luck, Tony
2007-05-21  6:28     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-05-19  1:25   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-19  2:03     ` [rfc] increase struct page size?! (now sparsemem vmemmap) Christoph Lameter
2007-05-19 15:43       ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-05-19 18:15     ` [rfc] increase struct page size?! William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-19 18:25       ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-20  4:10         ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-20 12:56           ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-21 17:08             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-22  0:30               ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-05-22  0:38                 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-22  0:58                   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-05-22  9:44                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2007-05-19 22:09       ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-20  7:26         ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-21  9:12         ` Helge Hafting
2007-05-21  9:45           ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-20  5:22       ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-20  8:46         ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-20  9:25           ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2007-05-21  8:08             ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-21  9:27               ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-21 11:26                 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-22  0:52                   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-21 22:43                 ` Matt Mackall
2007-05-22  1:08                   ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-22  1:13                     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-22  1:39                   ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-22  1:57                     ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-22  5:04                       ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-22  6:24                         ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-22 10:59                           ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-21  9:31               ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-21 17:06             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-20 17:13 ` Andrea Arcangeli

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070520092552.GA7318@wotan.suse.de \
    --to=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=clameter@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox