On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 08:00:28PM +0200, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > "Doing it from user space might show that it's not a performance
> > optimization that cna be noticed".
>
> Or it might. It is just too much work for me, because it is takes too long
> to do right.
>
> I believe when you manage to save 200K of active L2 cache lines from kernel
> use, then a user with a 512K L2 cache will notice it. The hlists are
> hopefully good for 20-40K. It would be a beginning at least.
You have to be hitting the inode cache pretty hard for this to be a big
deal, right? And that cache is already hidden behind the dcache, right?
I think the saving memory side of your argument is better than the cache
footprint one..
Perhaps there's another clever way to do this - is there a way to make the
list heads partially overlap? That is &hash[i-1].next == &hash[i].prev?
Sick, I know, but it might not mean a separate list implementation, just
special initialization - HASHLISTHEAD().
-- "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:34 EST