[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <84144f020911240328l3d36d347o6c91b2b1a0f50f2a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:28:53 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Tim Blechmann <tim@...ngt.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] slab.c: remove branch hint
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> (Pekka Cc:-ed)
>
> * Tim Blechmann <tim@...ngt.org> wrote:
>
>> branch profiling on my nehalem machine showed 99% incorrect branch hints:
>>
>> 28459 7678524 99 __cache_alloc_node slab.c
>> 3551
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tim Blechmann <tim@...ngt.org>
>> ---
>> mm/slab.c | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
>> index f70b326..4125fcd 100644
>> --- a/mm/slab.c
>> +++ b/mm/slab.c
>> @@ -3548,7 +3548,7 @@ __cache_alloc_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep,
>> gfp_t flags, int nodeid,
>> slab_irq_save(save_flags, this_cpu);
>> this_node = cpu_to_node(this_cpu);
>> - if (unlikely(nodeid == -1))
>> + if (nodeid == -1)
>> nodeid = this_node;
>> if (unlikely(!cachep->nodelists[nodeid])) {
That sounds odd to me. Can you see where the incorrectly predicted
calls are coming from? Calling kmem_cache_alloc_node() with node set
to -1 most of the time could be a real bug somewhere.
--
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