[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200707240005.22163.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 00:05:21 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/5] Dynamically allocated pageflags.
Hi,
On Monday, 23 July 2007 15:05, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> As we all know, pageflags have been a scarce resource for a while now. These
> patches seek to help address that issue by adding support for a new type
> of 'dynamically allocated' pageflag.
>
> The basic idea is that we use per node & zone bitmaps built out of order zero
> allocations, to replace bits in page->flags. Bitmaps can be sparse, being
> populated when a bit on the page is set, and returning zero for all bits in
> sparse pages. Untested hotplug support is included.
>
> This method of storing the data does of course come with a performance hit.
> I've included some simple timing loops in #ifdef'd code that help quantify
> that.
>
> Interestingly, the new implementation is actually quicker under some
> circumstances. In cases where the usage pattern involves operating on the
> flags for a number of pages in succession, the hit involved in getting the
> struct pages from main memory appears to be greater than that involved in
> calculating which unsigned long and bit to test.
>
> Tested only on UP (x86_64) so far.
How does it compare to the memory bitmaps used by swsusp, defined in
kernel/power/snapshot.c?
Greetings,
Rafael
--
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
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