[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 07:14:21 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
"Protasevich, Natalie" <Natalie.Protasevich@...sys.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Make NR_IRQS configurable in Kconfig
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 07:09, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Andrew Morton writes:
[adding linux-arch; talking about doing extensible per cpu areas
by prereserving virtual space and then later fill it up as needed]
> > > Drawback would be some more TLB misses.
> >
> > yup. On some (important) architectures - I'm not sure which architectures
> > do the bigpage-for-kernel trick.
>
> I looked at optimizing the per-cpu data accessors on PowerPC and only
> ever saw fractions of a percent change in overall performance, which
> says to me that we don't actually use per-cpu data all that much. So
> unless you make per-cpu data really really slow, I doubt that we'll
> see any significant performance difference.
The main problem is that we would need a "vmalloc reserve first; allocate pages
later" interface. On x86 it would be easy by just splitting up vmalloc/vmap a bit
again. Does anybody else see problems with implementing that on any
other architecture?
This wouldn't be truly demand paged, just pages initialized on allocation.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists