From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RANDOM] Move two variables to read_mostly section to save memory
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:44:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <476539D5.7050305@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071216130028.GB14233@stusta.de>
Adrian Bunk a écrit :
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 12:45:01PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> While examining vmlinux namelist on i686, I noticed :
>>
>> c0581300 D random_table
>> c0581480 d input_pool
>> c0581580 d random_read_wakeup_thresh
>> c0581584 d random_write_wakeup_thresh
>> c0581600 d blocking_pool
>>
>> That means that the two integers random_read_wakeup_thresh and
>> random_write_wakeup_thresh use a full cache entry (128 bytes).
>>
>> Moving them to read_mostly section can shrinks vmlinux by 120 bytes.
>>
>> # size vmlinux*
>> text data bss dec hex filename
>> 4835553 450210 610304 5896067 59f783 vmlinux.after_patch
>> 4835553 450330 610304 5896187 59f7fb vmlinux.before_patch
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/random.c b/drivers/char/random.c
>> index 5fee056..af48e86 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/random.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/random.c
>> @@ -256,14 +256,14 @@
>> * The minimum number of bits of entropy before we wake up a read on
>> * /dev/random. Should be enough to do a significant reseed.
>> */
>> -static int random_read_wakeup_thresh = 64;
>> +static int random_read_wakeup_thresh __read_mostly = 64;
>>
>> /*
>> * If the entropy count falls under this number of bits, then we
>> * should wake up processes which are selecting or polling on write
>> * access to /dev/random.
>> */
>> -static int random_write_wakeup_thresh = 128;
>> +static int random_write_wakeup_thresh __read_mostly = 128;
>
> Please never ever do such ugly and unmaintainable micro-optimizations in
> the code unless you can show a measurable performance improvement of the
> kernel.
You seem to to be confused between speed micro-otimizations and memory
savings. This patch has nothing to do about a speed optimization. Here, no
tradeoff justify a "measurable performance improvement" study.
I copied this patch to you because your recent proposal to remove read_mostly
from linux kernel.
Only you find read_mostly ugly and unmaintanable. I find it way more usefull
than "static" attributes.
I find 120 bytes is a measurable gain, thank you.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-16 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-16 11:45 Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 13:00 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-16 14:44 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2007-12-16 16:53 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-16 17:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 18:14 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-16 18:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 19:17 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-12-17 0:33 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-16 17:34 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-16 17:56 ` Eric Dumazet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=476539D5.7050305@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®