On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:09 PM, <pins...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> On Jul 26, 2015, at 11:50 AM, Andi Kleen <a...@firstfloor.org> wrote: >> >> Mikhail Maltsev <malts...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Hi, all! >>> Recently I did some profiling of GCC to find hotspots and areas of possible >>> performance improvement among them. glibc malloc(3) is one of (perhaps >>> known) >> >> I've been compiling gcc with tcmalloc to do a similar speedup. It would be >> interesting to compare that to your patch. >> >> Another useful optimization is to adjust the allocation size to be >= >> 2MB. Then modern Linux kernels often can give you a large page, >> which cuts down TLB overhead. I did similar changes some time >> ago for the garbage collector. > > Unless you are running with 64k pages which I do all the time on my armv8 > system.
This can be a host configurable value of course. But first of all (without looking at the patch but just reading the description) this sounds like a good idea. Maybe still allow pools to use their own backing if the object size is larger than the block size of the caching pool? Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Andrew > > >> >> BTW I saw big differences in larger LTO builds. >> >> -Andi >> >> -- >> a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
