[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140103141816.20ef2a24c8adffae040e53dc@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:18:16 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
penberg@...nel.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] re-shrink 'struct page' when SLUB is on.
On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 10:01:47 -0800 Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net> wrote:
> This is a minor update from the last version. The most notable
> thing is that I was able to demonstrate that maintaining the
> cmpxchg16 optimization has _some_ value.
>
> Otherwise, the code changes are just a few minor cleanups.
>
> ---
>
> SLUB depends on a 16-byte cmpxchg for an optimization which
> allows it to not disable interrupts in its fast path. This
> optimization has some small but measurable benefits:
>
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/52B345A3.6090700@sr71.net
So really the only significant benefit from the cmpxchg16 is with
cache-cold eight-byte kmalloc/kfree? 8% faster in this case? But with
cache-hot kmalloc/kfree the benefit of cmpxchg16 is precisely zero.
This is really weird and makes me suspect a measurement glitch.
Even if this 8% is real, it's unclear that it's worth all the
complexity the cmpxchg16 adds.
It would be really useful (hint :)) if we were to know exactly where
that 8% is coming from - perhaps it's something which is not directly
related to the cmpxchg16, and we can fix it separately.
--
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