[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807010837510.20870@hp.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:43:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
cc: Hideo Saito <saito@...san.co.jp>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: follow_page() performance regressions
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, Paul Mundt wrote:
>
> So yes, the ZERO_PAGE handling in follow_page() is causing the slow-down here.
I suspect it could be any of:
- actual code generation differences in follow_page() (some SH person
needs to check that)
- some cache issue on SH. ZERO_PAGE is a single page at a fixed virtual
address, while it used to populate the page tables with individual
pages. Normally, this should be *better* for caching, but maybe there
is some conflict? What kind of caches does SH have (virtually indexed?)
- hackbench relying on follow_page() to populate the page tables, which
it no longer does for anonymous areas (using ZERO_PAGE directly
instead).
Again, normally this would speed things up (fewer TLB misses etc), but
if it then causes a new page fault that used to have been covered by
follow_page(), who knows?
What does hackbench actually do? Anybody?
Linus
--
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