Richard Braun, le Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:56:57 +0100, a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:47:10AM +0100, Justus Winter wrote:
> > No, but I profiled this. This is the output of pahole (on the left)
> > and the results of my profiling on the right. The rightmost number is
> > the access count. Thi
On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:47:10AM +0100, Justus Winter wrote:
> No, but I profiled this. This is the output of pahole (on the left)
> and the results of my profiling on the right. The rightmost number is
> the access count. This is the situation before my patch:
This looks fine to me, although
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-01-06 02:43:20)
> Justus Winter, le Mon 06 Jan 2014 00:34:55 +0100, a écrit :
> > * kern/slab.h (struct kmem_cache): Reorder the fields so that all hot
> > fields are within the first cache line.
>
> Did you try to benchmark this a bit?
>
> I'm unsure about all movem
Justus Winter, le Mon 06 Jan 2014 00:34:55 +0100, a écrit :
> * kern/slab.h (struct kmem_cache): Reorder the fields so that all hot
> fields are within the first cache line.
Did you try to benchmark this a bit?
I'm unsure about all movements: nr_free_slabs, for instance, should
probably really go
* kern/slab.h (struct kmem_cache): Reorder the fields so that all hot
fields are within the first cache line.
---
kern/slab.h | 18 --
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kern/slab.h b/kern/slab.h
index fd65893..457dee4 100644
--- a/kern/slab.h
+++ b/kern
