From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752678Ab0GVPwa (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:52:30 -0400 Received: from vms173005pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.5]:61333 "EHLO vms173005pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751561Ab0GVPw2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:52:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:52:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Len Brown X-X-Sender: lenb@localhost.localdomain To: Jack Steiner Cc: mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] - Mapping ACPI tables as CACHED In-reply-to: <20100722152220.GA18290@sgi.com> Message-id: References: <20100722152220.GA18290@sgi.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The following experimental patch changes the kernel mapping for ACPI tables > to CACHED. This eliminates the page attibute conflict & allows users to map > the tables CACHEABLE. This significantly speeds up boot: > > 38 minutes without the patch > 27 minutes with the patch > ~30% improvement > > Time to run ACPIDUMP on a large system: > 527 seconds without the patch > 8 seconds with the patch Interesting. Can you detect a performance differene on a 1-node machine that doesn't magnify the penalty of the remote uncached access? thanks, -Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Cetner