lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.19-rc1: x86_64 slowdown in lmbench's fork
Date
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> writes:

>> So unless there is some other array that is sized by NR_IRQs
>> in the context switch path which could account for this in
>> other ways. It looks like you just got unlucky.
>
>
> TLB/cache profiling data might be useful?
> My bet would be more on cache effects.

The only way I can see that being true is if some irq was keeping
the cache line warm for something in the process startup.

I have trouble seeing how adding 1K to an already 1K data structure
can cause a cache fault that wasn't happening already.

>> The only hypothesis that I can seem to come up with is that maybe
>> you are getting an extra tlb now that you didn't use to.
>> I think the per cpu area is covered by huge pages but maybe not.
>
> It should be.

Which invalidates the tlb fault hypothesis unless it happens to lie
on the 2MB boundary.

Eric
-
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: 2006-11-03 19:21    [W:0.063 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site