Re: [RFC 0/4] [RFC] slub: Fastpath optimization (especially for RT)

[Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>]

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 09:41:49AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > I found that you said retrieving tid first is sufficient to do
> > things right in old discussion. :)
> 
> Right but the tid can be obtained from a different processor.
> 
> 
> One other aspect of this patchset is that it reduces the cache footprint
> of the alloc and free functions. This typically results in a performance
> increase for the allocator. If we can avoid the page_address() and
> virt_to_head_page() stuff that is required because we drop the ->page
> field in a sufficient number of places then this may be a benefit that
> goes beyond the RT and CONFIG_PREEMPT case.

Yeah... if we can avoid those function calls, it would be good.

But, current struct kmem_cache_cpu occupies just 32 bytes on 64 bits
machine, and, that means just 1 cacheline. Reducing size of struct may have
no remarkable performance benefit in this case.

Thanks.

--
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>