[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19012.37515.146191.198843@robur.slu.se>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:19:07 +0200
From: Robert Olsson <robert@...ur.slu.se>
To: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3_Staszewski?=
<pstaszewski@...are.pl>, Robert Olsson <robert.olsson@....uu.se>,
Linux Network Development list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: rib_trie / Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
Jarek Poplawski writes:
> >> oprofile: using NMI interrupt.
> >> Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
> >> Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
> >> Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
> >> Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
> >> Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
> >> Fix inflate_threshold_root. Now=15 size=11 bits
> On the other hand, even if there is no problem with memory, it seems
> because of hitting max_resize the threshold should be changed, e.g.
> by reverting the patch below.
You seem to have some temporary memory problem. So the printout might be
a bit misleading in this case. We really like to keep the root node as big
as we can to keep the tree as flat as possible for performance reasons.
(We're even more motivated now when we can disable the route cache)
So I'll guess the next insert/delete inflates the root node to be within
the interval. So I'll assume this just a temporary failure?
I would be nice to have *threshholds* settable by /proc or /sys. I would
use this in the other direction to trade memory for even faster lookups.
But maybe experts memory allocation has some good suggestions.
Cheers.
--ro
--
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