lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Quicklist is slighly problematic.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 09:10:47AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Hi Cristoph,
> >
> > Thank you for explain your quicklist plan at OLS.
> >
> > So, I made summary to issue of quicklist.
> > if you have a bit time, Could you please read this mail and patches?
> > And, if possible, Could you please tell me your feeling?
>
> I believe what I said at the OLS was that quicklists are fundamentally crappy
> and should be replaced by something that works (Guess that is what you meant
> by "plan"?). Quicklists were generalized from the IA64 arch code.
>
> Good fixup but I would think that some more radical rework is needed.
>
> Maybe some of this needs to vanish into the TLB handling logic?
>
> Then I have thought for awhile that the main reason that quicklists exist are
> the performance problems in the page allocator. If you can make the single
> page alloc / free pass competitive in performance with quicklists then we
> could get rid of all uses.

It is more than the free/alloc cycle, the quicklist saves us from
having to zero the page. In a sparsely filled page table, it saves time
and cache footprint. In a heavily used page table, you end up with a
near wash.

One problem I see is somebody got rid of the node awareness. We used
to not put pages onto a quicklist when they were being released from a
different node than the cpu is on. Not sure where that went. It was
done because of the trap page problem described here.

Thanks,
Robin


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-21 04:17    [W:1.041 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site