Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?

Folkert van Heusden a écrit :

size-131072            0      0 131072
size-65536             0      0  65536
size-32768            20     20  32768
size-16384             8      9  16384
size-8192             37     38   8192
size-4096            269    269   4096
size-2048            793    910   2048
size-1024            564    608   1024
size-512             702    856    512
size-256            1485   4005    256
size-128            1209   1350    128
size-64             2858   3363     64
size-32             1538   2714     64
Intel(R) Xeon(TM) MP CPU 3.00GHz
address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual


Folkert van Heusden

Hi Folkert

Your results are interesting : size-32 seems to use objects of size 64 !

> size-32             1538   2714     64 <<HERE>>

So I guess that size-32 cache could be avoided at least for EMT (I take you run a 64 bits kernel ?)

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
    • From: Folkert van Heusden <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [ANNOUNCE] GIT 1.0.0
    • From: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>
  • [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
    • From: Ed Tomlinson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
    • From: Folkert van Heusden <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] sched: Fix adverse effects of NFS client on interactive response
• Next by Date: Re: Large thread wakeup (scheduling) delay spikes
• Previous by thread: Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
• Next by thread: Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]