Re: [rfc][patch] radix-tree: small data structure

Nick Piggin wrote:

With the previous patch, the radix_tree_node budget on my 64-bit
desktop is cut from 20MB to 10MB. This patch should cut it again
by nearly a factor of 4 (haven't verified, but 98ish % of files
are under 64K).

I wonder if this would be of any interest for those who enable
CONFIG_BASE_SMALL?

Bah, wrong patch.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

This patch reduces radix tree node memory usage by about a factor of 4
on many small files (< 64K) scenarios, and results in perfect packing of
the index range into 32 and 64 bits. There are pointer traversal and
memory usage costs for large files with dense pagecache.

Index: linux-2.6/lib/radix-tree.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/lib/radix-tree.c
+++ linux-2.6/lib/radix-tree.c
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
 
 
 #ifdef __KERNEL__
-#define RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT	6
+#define RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT	(CONFIG_BASE_SMALL ? 4 : 6)
 #else
 #define RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT	3	/* For more stressful testing */
 #endif

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [rfc][patch] radix-tree: small data structure
    • From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [rfc][patch] radix-tree: small data structure
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [rfc][patch] radix-tree: small data structure
• Next by Date: cpu frequency scaling on celeron laptop
• Previous by thread: [rfc][patch] radix-tree: small data structure
• Next by thread: Re: [rfc][patch] radix-tree: small data structure
• 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]