Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 May 2007 09:32:23 +0200 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [rfc] increase struct page size?! |
| |
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 12:19:05AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2007 06:08:54 +0200 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote: > > > Many batch operations on struct page are completely random, > > But they shouldn't be: we should aim to place physically contiguous pages > into logically contiguous pagecache slots, for all the reasons we > discussed.
For big IO batch operations, pagecache would be more likely to be physically contiguous, as would LRU, I suppose.
I'm more thinking of operations where things get reclaimed over time, touched or dirtied in slightly different orderings, interleaved with other allocations, etc.
> If/when that happens, there will be a *lot* of locality of reference > against the pageframes in a lot of important codepaths.
And when it doesn't happen, we eat 75% more cache misses. And for that matter we eat 75% more cache misses for non-batch operations like allocating or freeing a page by slab, for example.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |