Re: [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking

On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:

> Well, not really "good approximation" it sounds to me, the sensibility
> goes down to L1_CACHE_LINE/sizeof(u32), which is:
> 
> - 8 on 32-byte cacheline
> - 16 on 64-byte cacheline 
> - 32 on 128-byte cacheline
> 
> Right?
> 
> So the (nice!) refault histogram gets limited to those values?

I agree that 7 would be too small.  I guess I should limit the
minimum size of the nonresident hash bucket to 15 entries...

-- 
All Rights Reversed
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [RFC 0/3] non-resident page tracking
    • From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
  • [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking
    • From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking
    • From: Marcelo Tosatti <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking
    • From: Marcelo Tosatti <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [openib-general] Re: [PATCH repost] PROT_DONTCOPY: ifiniband uverbs fork support
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] consolidate sys_ptrace
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC 1/3] non-resident page tracking
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

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