From: "Song, Xiongwei" <Xiongwei.Song@windriver.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"rientjes@google.com" <rientjes@google.com>,
"cl@linux.com" <cl@linux.com>,
"penberg@kernel.org" <penberg@kernel.org>,
"iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com" <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"roman.gushchin@linux.dev" <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
"42.hyeyoo@gmail.com" <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"chengming.zhou@linux.dev" <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/4] mm/slub: simplify get_partial_node()
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 11:15:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB5192F328F5BC9252AE0EB70AEC3D2@PH0PR11MB5192.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2cab01ce-7c5f-46d6-b8a4-c2a24c3f9a32@suse.cz>
>
> On 4/3/24 2:37 AM, Song, Xiongwei wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> It could be tempting to use >= instead of > to achieve the same effect but
> >> that would have unintended performance effects that would best be evaluated
> >> separately.
> >
> > I can run a test to measure Amean changes. But in terms of x86 assembly, there
> > should not be extra instructions with ">=".
> >
> > Did a simple test, for ">=" it uses "jle" instruction, while "jl" instruction is used for ">".
> > No more instructions involved. So there should not be performance effects on x86.
>
> Right, I didn't mean the code of the test, but how the difference of the
> comparison affects how many cpu partial slabs would be put on the cpu
> partial list here.
Got it. Will do measurement for it.
Thanks,
Xiongwei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-03 11:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-31 2:19 [PATCH 0/4] SLUB: improve filling cpu partial a bit in get_partial_node() xiongwei.song
2024-03-31 2:19 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm/slub: remove the check of !kmem_cache_has_cpu_partial() xiongwei.song
2024-04-02 9:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-04-03 0:10 ` Song, Xiongwei
2024-03-31 2:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm/slub: add slub_get_cpu_partial() helper xiongwei.song
2024-03-31 2:19 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm/slub: simplify get_partial_node() xiongwei.song
2024-04-02 9:41 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-04-03 0:37 ` Song, Xiongwei
2024-04-03 7:25 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-04-03 11:15 ` Song, Xiongwei [this message]
2024-03-31 2:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm/slub: don't read slab->cpu_partial_slabs directly xiongwei.song
2024-04-02 9:42 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-04-03 0:11 ` Song, Xiongwei
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=PH0PR11MB5192F328F5BC9252AE0EB70AEC3D2@PH0PR11MB5192.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=xiongwei.song@windriver.com \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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