Re: Tomas Vondra > If it's a reliable fix, then I guess we can do it like this. But won't > that be a performance penalty on everyone? Or does the system split the > array into 16-element chunks anyway, so this makes no difference?
There's still the overhead of the syscall itself. But no idea how costly it is to have this 16-step loop in user or kernel space. We could claim that on 32-bit systems, shared_buffers would be smaller anyway, so there the overhead isn't that big. And the step size should be larger (if at all) on 64-bit. > Anyway, maybe we should start by reporting this to the kernel people. Do > you want me to do that, or shall one of you take care of that? I suppose > that'd be better, as you already wrote a fix / know the code better. Submitted: https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=175077821909222&w=2 Christoph
