[lkml]   [1996]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: X much slower in 2.0.24 than in 1.2.13
Date (Alan Cox) writes:
| > The 2.0.24 changes to "struct sock" in "linux/include/net/sock.h" push
| > its size, in my kernel, up to 0x1fc. This new size, plus the
| > "kmalloc"'s "block_header" is just big enough to push "struct sock"
| > allocations to the next allocation order.
| We hardly ever allocate a struct sock

I wasn't thinking of the actual *allocation* overhead; I was thinking
of the working set of (unswappable) pages needed to play with a bunch
of existing "struct sock"s. Perhaps this isn't as much of an issue as
I first assumed, but I see all that extra time spent in "free_pages"
and "_get_free_pages", and I imagine the kernel working twice as hard
to find memory for everything else simply because its pool of "struct
sock"s is twice as big as it used to be.

Kevin <>

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.045 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site