[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071113204100.GB20167@lazybastard.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:41:00 +0100
From: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Ray Lee <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Subject: Re: x86_64: Make sparsemem/vmemmap the default memory model
On Mon, 12 November 2007 20:41:10 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Ray Lee wrote:
>
> > Discontig obviously needs to die. However, FlatMem is consistently
> > faster, averaging about 2.1% better overall for your numbers above. Is
> > the page allocator not, erm, a fast path, where that matters?
> >
> > Order Flat Sparse % diff
> > 0 639 641 0.3
>
> IMHO Order 0 currently matters most and the difference is negligible
> there.
Is it? I am a bit concerned about the non-monotonic distribution.
Difference starts a near-0, grows to 4.4, drops to near-0, grows to 4.9,
drops to near-0.
Order Flat Sparse % diff
0 639 641 0.3
1 567 593 4.4
2 679 692 1.9
3 763 781 2.3
4 961 962 0.1
5 1356 1392 2.6
6 2224 2336 4.8
7 4869 5074 4.0
8 12500 12732 1.8
9 27926 28165 0.8
10 58578 58682 0.2
Is there an explanation for this behaviour? More to the point, could
repeated runs also return 4% difference for order-0?
Jörn
--
It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.
-- Samuel Adams
-
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