linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/7] [RFC] SLUB: Improve allocpercpu to reduce per cpu access overhead

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 12 Nov 2007 20:48:20 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
CC:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, penberg@...helsinki.fi
Subject: Re: [patch 0/7] [RFC] SLUB: Improve allocpercpu to reduce per cpu
 access overhead

Christoph Lameter a écrit :
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
>> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>> Each IP compression tunnel instance does an alloc_percpu().
>> Actually all IPComp tunnels share one set of objects which are
>> allocated per-cpu.  So only the first tunnel would do that.
> 
> Ahh so the need to be able to expand per cpu memory storage on demand 
> is not as critical as we thought.
> 

Yes, but still desirable for future optimizations.

For example, I do think using a per cpu memory storage on net_device refcnt & 
last_rx could give us some speedups.



-
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/