From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wj0-f200.google.com (mail-wj0-f200.google.com [209.85.210.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F2F66B0389 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:25:34 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wj0-f200.google.com with SMTP id kq3so13736858wjc.1 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:25:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de. [2a01:4f8:120:8448::d00d]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f25si3816500wrc.285.2017.02.10.14.25.33 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:25:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 23:25:22 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: PCID review? Message-ID: <20170210222522.udpl6cgai24lg5tf@pd.tnic> References: <20170209001042.ahxmoqegr6h74mle@techsingularity.net> <20170210110157.dlejz7szrj3r3pwq@techsingularity.net> <20170210215708.j54cawm23nepgimd@techsingularity.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Mel Gorman , Andy Lutomirski , Nadav Amit , Kees Cook , Dave Hansen , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "Paul E. McKenney" On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 02:07:19PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > We'll see. The main benchmark that I'm relying on (so far) is that > context switches get way faster, just ping ponging back and forth. I > suspect that the TLB refill cost is only a small part. Is that a microbenchmark or something more "presentable"? We really should pay attention to the complexity and what that actually brings us in the end. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. -- 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