[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101019103759.GC32212@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 12:37:59 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch]x86: spread tlb flush vector between nodes
* Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 16:44 +0800, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Technically, it is way too late for anything new in this merge window, but we can
> > > try to make a reasonable assessment of the risk since the merge window got
> > > delayed. However, this close to the merge window you cannot just expect to be
> > > merged even if the patch itself is OK.
> >
> > a prompt re-send of the patch today-ish, with proper changelog, etc. and with
> > the new tuning in place is definitely a must.
>
> the previous patch has changelog. what did you mean a new tuning?
The new tuning would be the 8->32 patch - but that would be a more complex and
separate (and definitely controversial) patch anyway.
So if hpa gives his ack we can try this current spread-tlb-vectors-better patch in
-tip and see how it fares. Could you please update the changelog to specify the 20%
improvement more precisely? What kind of workload was used and how was the
improvement measured?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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