From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
Zhang Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [this_cpu_xx V6 7/7] this_cpu: slub aggressive use of this_cpu operations in the hotpaths
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:08:12 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910141003590.9944@gentwo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091014133457.GB5027@csn.ul.ie>
The test did not include the irqless patch I hope?
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Small gains in the User, System and Elapsed times with this-cpu patches
> applied. It is interest to note for the mean times that the patches more
> than close the gap between SLUB and SLAB for the most part - the
> exception being User which has marginally better performance. This might
> indicate that SLAB is still slightly better at giving back cache-hot
> memory but this is speculation.
The queuing in SLAB allows a better cache hot behavior. Without a queue
SLUB has a difficult time improvising cache hot behavior based on objects
restricted to a slab page. Therefore the size of the slab page will
affect how much "queueing" SLUB can do.
> The patches mostly improve the performance of netperf UDP_STREAM by a good
> whack so the patches are a plus here. However, it should also be noted that
> SLAB was mostly faster than SLUB, particularly for large packet sizes. Refresh
> my memory, how do SLUB and SLAB differ in regards to off-loading large
> allocations to the page allocator these days?
SLUB offloads allocations > 8k to the page allocator.
SLAB does create large slabs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-14 14:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-07 21:10 [this_cpu_xx V6 0/7] Introduce per cpu atomic operations and avoid per cpu address arithmetic cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 1/7] this_cpu_ops: page allocator conversion cl
2009-10-08 10:38 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-08 10:40 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-08 16:15 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-08 10:53 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 2/7] this_cpu ops: Remove pageset_notifier cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 3/7] Use this_cpu operations in slub cl
2009-10-12 10:19 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 10:21 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 14:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 2:13 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-13 14:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 14:56 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-13 15:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 1:57 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 7:47 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-16 16:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-18 3:11 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 4/7] SLUB: Get rid of dynamic DMA kmalloc cache allocation cl
2009-10-13 18:48 ` [FIX] patch "SLUB: Get rid of dynamic DMA kmalloc cache allocation" Christoph Lameter
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 5/7] this_cpu: Remove slub kmem_cache fields cl
2009-10-07 23:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 6/7] Make slub statistics use this_cpu_inc cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 7/7] this_cpu: slub aggressive use of this_cpu operations in the hotpaths cl
2009-10-12 10:40 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 13:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-12 14:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 9:45 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 14:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 19:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 19:44 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-13 19:48 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 20:15 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 20:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 22:53 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-14 13:34 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-14 14:08 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2009-10-14 15:49 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-14 15:53 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-14 15:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 16:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-14 18:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 10:50 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 18:40 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-15 9:03 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 16:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 18:43 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 18:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 20:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 1:33 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 15:40 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 0/7] Introduce per cpu atomic operations and avoid per cpu address arithmetic Mel Gorman
2009-10-13 15:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 16:09 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-13 17:17 ` Christoph Lameter
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=alpine.DEB.1.10.0910141003590.9944@gentwo.org \
--to=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.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®