> Pretty close race - vmalloc is slightly faster if anything. I don't think that test tells us anything interesting about the relative load on the TLB. What would be interesting is seeing the effect vmalloc()ed hashes have on a concurrently running load that puts heavy pressure on the TLB. - z - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance
- References:
- Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com>
- Re: Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
- Re: Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>
- Re: Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
- Re: Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance
- From: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>
- Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com>
- Ocfs2 performance bugs of doom
- Prev by Date: Re: [rfc] separate sharpsl_pm initialization from sysfs code
- Next by Date: Re: How can I link the kernel with libgcc ?
- Previous by thread: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance
- Next by thread: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Ocfs2 performance
- Index(es):
 |