[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 09:08:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, aravinda@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Network stack, first user of SLAB/kmem_cache
bulk free API.
On Wed, 9 Sep 2015, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > Hmmm... Guess we need to come up with distinct version of kmalloc() for
> > irq and non irq contexts to take advantage of that . Most at non irq
> > context anyways.
>
> I agree, it would be an easy win. Do notice this will have the most
> impact for the slAb allocator.
>
> I estimate alloc + free cost would save:
> * slAb would save approx 60 cycles
> * slUb would save approx 4 cycles
>
> We might consider keeping the slUb approach as it would be more
> friendly for RT with less IRQ disabling.
IRQ disabling it a mixed bag. Older cpus have higher latencies there and
also virtualized contexts may require the hypervisor tracks the interrupt
state.
For recent intel cpus this is certainly a workable approach.
--
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