[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [MODSLAB 3/7] A Kmalloc subsystem
Christoph Lameter wrote:

>On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>>What about:
>>if (unlikely(addr & (~(PAGE_SIZE-1))))
>> slabp=virt_to_page(addr)->pagefield;
>> slabp=addr & (~(PAGE_SIZE-1));
>Well this would not be working with the simple slab design that puts the
>first element at the page border to simplify alignment.
>And as we have just seen virt to page is mostly an address
>calculation in many configurations. I doubt that there would be a great
>advantage. Todays processors biggest cause for latencies are
>cacheline misses..
It involves table walking on discontigmem archs. "slabp=addr &
(~(PAGE_SIZE-1));" means no pointer chasing, and the access touches the
same page, i.e. definitively no TLB miss.

> Some arithmetic with addresses does not seem to
>be that important. Misaligning data in order to not put objects on such
>boundaries could be an issue.
> > Modify the kmalloc caches slightly and use non-power-of-2 cache sizes. Move
>>the kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE) users to gfp.
>Power of 2 cache sizes make the object align neatly to cacheline
>boundaries and make them fit tightly into a page.
IMHO not really an issue. 2kb-cache_line_size() also aligns perfectly.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-19 20:57    [W:0.055 / U:53.608 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site