lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Lse-tech] Re: [RFC] dcache scalability patch (2.4.17)


On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Paul Menage wrote:

> >Note: measurements on 2.4 do not make sense; reduction of cacheline
> >bouncing between 2.4 and 2.5 will change the results anyway and
> >if any of these patches are going to be applied to 2.4, reduction of
> >cacheline bouncing on ->d_count is going to go in before that one.
>
> I think there are some other possibilities for cache-bounce removal in
> struct dentry. The most obvious one is d_vfs_flags - not only does it
> get written to on every d_lookup (to set DCACHE_REFERENCED) but it also
> shares a cache line (on Pentium IV) with d_op, d_iname and part of
> d_name (along with d_sb and d_fsdata, but these don't seem to be so
> crucial).
>
> Some quick stats gathering suggested that DCACHE_REFERENCED is already
> set 95%-98% of the time, so this cache bounce is not even doing anything
> useful. I submitted this patch a while ago making the DCACHE_REFERENCED
> bit setting be conditional on it not being already set, which didn't
> generate any interest. One problem with this patch would be the
> additional branch prediction misses (on some architectures?) that would
> work against the benefits of not dirtying a cache line.

Frankly, I'd rather moved setting DCACHE_REFERENCED to dput(). We don't
care for that bit for dentries with positive ->d_count.

So I'd just do

vi fs/dcache.c -c '/|= DCACHE_R/d|/nr_un/pu|<|x'
and be done with that. Linus?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.101 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site