[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106201459390.17524@router.home>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:01:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, tj@...nel.org,
Metathronius Galabant <m.galabant@...glemail.com>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Adrian Drzewiecki <z@...e.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [slub p2 0/4] SLUB: [RFC] Per cpu partial lists V2
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:32:44AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > The following patchset applied on top of the lockless patchset V7. It
> > introduces per cpu partial lists which allow a performance increase of
> > around ~15 during contention for the nodelock (can be tested using
> > hackbench).
>
> What size system did you test it on?
Sandybridge 4 core (8 cpus) 8G Ram.
> > These lists help to avoid per nodelocking overhead. Allocator latency
> > could be further reduced by making these operations work without
> > disabling interrupts (like the fastpath and the free slowpath) as well as
> > implementing better ways of handling ther cpu array with partial pages.
>
> I think we really need better batching for the transfers.
Could you elaborate on that cryptic remark?
--
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