lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 1 Mar 2007 21:40:45 -0800 (PST)
FromChristoph Lameter <>
SubjectRe: The performance and behaviour of the anti-fragmentation related patches
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:

> So what do you mean by efficient? I guess you aren't talking about CPU
> efficiency, because even if you make the IO subsystem submit larger
> physical IOs, you still have to deal with 256 billion TLB entries, the
> pagecache has to deal with 256 billion struct pages, so does the
> filesystem code to build the bios.

You do not have to deal with TLB entries if you do buffered I/O.

For mmapped I/O you would want to transparently use 2M TLBs if the 
page size is large.

> So you are having problems with your IO controller's handling of sg
> lists?

We currently have problems with the kernel limits of 128 SG 
entries but the fundamental issue is that we can only do 2 Meg of I/O in 
one go given the default limits of the block layer. Typically the number 
of hardware SG entrie is also limited. We never will be able to put a 



-
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: 2007-03-02 06:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2008