[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160422144957.64619ee9b19991e4fdf89668@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:49:57 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Roman Peniaev <r.peniaev@...il.com>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: Keep a separate lazy-free list
On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:14:31 +0100 Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > > purge_fragmented_blocks() manages per-cpu lists, so that looks safe
> > > under its own rcu_read_lock.
> > >
> > > Yes, it looks feasible to remove the purge_lock if we can relax sync.
> >
> > what is still left is waiting on vmap_area_lock for !sync mode.
> > but probably is not that bad.
>
> Ok, that's bit beyond my comfort zone with a patch to change the free
> list handling. I'll chicken out for the time being, atm I am more
> concerned that i915.ko may call set_page_wb() frequently on individual
> pages.
Nick Piggin's vmap rewrite. 20x (or more) faster.
https://lwn.net/Articles/285341/
10 years ago, never finished.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists