From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E73A86B0044 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 16:01:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [MM] Make mm counters per cpu instead of atomic From: Andi Kleen References: Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:01:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Christoph Lameter's message of "Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:14:41 -0500 (EST)") Message-ID: <87r5se80oe.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , "hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk" , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Tejun Heo List-ID: Christoph Lameter writes: > > One price to pay for these improvements is the need to scan over all percpu > counters when the actual count values are needed. Do you have numbers how costly alloc_percpu() is? I wonder what this does to fork() overhead. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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