[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <509D2B9B.4090305@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 08:13:15 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mjg59@...f.ucam.org,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, maxime.coquelin@...ricsson.com,
loic.pallardy@...ricsson.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
kmpark@...radead.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
lenb@...nel.org, rjw@...k.pl, gargankita@...il.com,
amit.kachhap@...aro.org, thomas.abraham@...aro.org,
santosh.shilimkar@...com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8][Sorted-buddy] mm: Linux VM Infrastructure to
support Memory Power Management
On 11/09/2012 07:23 AM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> FWIW, kernbench is actually (and surprisingly) showing a slight performance
> *improvement* with this patchset, over vanilla 3.7-rc3, as I mentioned in
> my other email to Dave.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/7/428
>
> I don't think I can dismiss it as an experimental error, because I am seeing
> those results consistently.. I'm trying to find out what's behind that.
The only numbers in that link are in the date. :) Let's see the
numbers, please.
If you really have performance improvement to the memory allocator (or
something else) here, then surely it can be pared out of your patches
and merged quickly by itself. Those kinds of optimizations are hard to
come by!
--
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