[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <472A1F8A.2070708@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:48:42 -0700
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] INET : removes per bucket rwlock in tcp/dccp ehash table
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger a écrit :
>
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:16:20 +0100
>> Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com> wrote:
>>
>>> As done two years ago on IP route cache table (commit
>>> 22c047ccbc68fa8f3fa57f0e8f906479a062c426) , we can avoid using one
>>> lock per hash bucket for the huge TCP/DCCP hash tables.
The TCP hashes are looked at with higher frequency than the route cache yes?
>>> On a typical x86_64 platform, this saves about 2MB or 4MB of ram, for
>>> litle performance differences. (we hit a different cache line for the
>>> rwlock, but then the bucket cache line have a better sharing factor
>>> among cpus, since we dirty it less often)
>>>
>>> Using a 'small' table of hashed rwlocks should be more than enough to
>>> provide correct SMP concurrency between different buckets, without
>>> using too much memory. Sizing of this table depends on NR_CPUS and
>>> various CONFIG settings.
Something is telling me finding a 64 core system with a suitable workload to try
this could be a good thing. Wish I had one at my disposal.
rick jones
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists