[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081105182615.GG7286@localhost>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 21:26:15 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, lguest@...abs.org,
jeremy@...source.com, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes
[H. Peter Anvin - Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 10:20:23AM -0800]
| Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| >
| > I see. Thanks! Btw Peter, I remember I read long time ago about
| > segment caches (well... in time of DOS programming actually). But
| > there was only 'common' words like this cache exist. But maybe
| > it's possible to know what exactly size of such a cache is?
| > You mentoined number 32. (heh... I hadn't remember it until
| > you mentoined about such a cache :-)
| >
|
| As with any other caching structure, you can discover its size,
| associativity, and replacement policy by artificially trying to provoke
| patterns that produce pathological timings.
|
| At Transmeta, at one time we used a 32-entry direct-mapped cache, which
| ended up with a ~96% hit rate on common Win95 benchmarks.
|
| I should, however, make it clear that there are other alternatives for
| speeding up segment descriptor loading, and not all of them rely on a cache.
|
| -hpa
|
Thanks a lot for explanation!
- Cyrill -
--
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