lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 08:48:49 -0800 From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: __GFP_REPEAT usage in fq_alloc_node On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote: > > I wonder what's that cause of the penalty (when accessing the vmapped > area I suppose?) Is it higher risk of collisions cache misses within the > area, compared to consecutive physical adresses? I believe tests were done with 48 fq qdisc, each having 2^16 slots. So I had 48 blocs,of 524288 bytes. Trying a bit harder at setup time to get 128 consecutive pages got less TLB pressure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists