lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Support multiple pages allocation
On Thu 04-07-13 13:24:50, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 12:01:43AM +0800, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
> > On 07/03/2013 11:51 PM, Zhang Yanfei wrote:
> > > On 07/03/2013 11:28 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >> On Wed 03-07-13 17:34:15, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >>> For one page allocation at once, this patchset makes allocator slower than
> > >>> before (-5%).
> > >>
> > >> Slowing down the most used path is a no-go. Where does this slow down
> > >> come from?
> > >
> > > I guess, it might be: for one page allocation at once, comparing to the original
> > > code, this patch adds two parameters nr_pages and pages and will do extra checks
> > > for the parameter nr_pages in the allocation path.
> > >
> >
> > If so, adding a separate path for the multiple allocations seems better.
>
> Hello, all.
>
> I modify the code for optimizing one page allocation via likely macro.
> I attach a new one at the end of this mail.
>
> In this case, performance degradation for one page allocation at once is -2.5%.
> I guess, remained overhead comes from two added parameters.
> Is it unreasonable cost to support this new feature?

Which benchmark you are using for this testing?

> I think that readahead path is one of the most used path, so this penalty looks
> endurable. And after supporting this feature, we can find more use cases.

What about page faults? I would oppose that page faults are _much_ more
frequent than read ahead so you really cannot slow them down.

[...]
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-04 13:01    [W:0.924 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site