Paul M wrote:
> I didn't notice any performance hit on a pure allocate/free memory
> benchmark relative to non-cgroup cpusets.
Good.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1.925.6
Paul M wrote:
> It's two constant-indexed dereferences *in total*, compared to a
> single constant-indexed dereference in the pre-cgroup case.
Ok - the C expression is longer and I didn't realize how
little difference it made in the end (the executing code.)
Good - thanks.
--
On 10/4/07, Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul M,
>
> This snippet from the memory allocation hot path worries me a bit.
>
> Once per memory page allocation, we go through here, needing to peak inside
> the current tasks cpuset to see if it has changed (it's 'mems_generation'
> value do
Paul M,
This snippet from the memory allocation hot path worries me a bit.
Once per memory page allocation, we go through here, needing to peak inside
the current tasks cpuset to see if it has changed (it's 'mems_generation'
value doesn't match the last seen value we have stashed in the task stru
4 matches
Mail list logo
