[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1271704575.1676.251.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:16:15 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] mm: Preemptible mmu_gather
On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 22:36 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 13:25 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Have you done some profiling on this? What I would like to see, if
> > it's not too much complexity, is to have a small set of pages to
> > handle common size frees, and then use them up first by default
> > before attempting to allocate more.
> >
> > Also, it would be cool to be able to chain allocations to avoid
> > TLB flushes even on big frees (overridable by arch of course, in
> > case they're doing some non-preeemptible work or you wish to break
> > up lock hold times). But that might be just getting over engineered.
[ patch to do very long queues ]
One thing that comes from having preemptible mmu_gather, and esp. when
we allow such very long gathers, is that we can potentially have a very
large amount of pages stuck on these lists.
So we'd need to hook into reclaim somehow to allow flushing of them when
we're falling short.
--
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