Re: [Lhms-devel] [RFC] buddy allocator without bitmap [2/4]

All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
To: Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel ML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	lhms <lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] [RFC] buddy allocator without bitmap  [2/4]
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:11:09 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1093561869.2984.360.camel@nighthawk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <412E6CC3.8060908@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 16:05, Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA wrote:
> I understand using these macros cleans up codes as I used them in my previous
> version.
> 
> In the previous version, I used SetPagePrivate()/ClearPagePrivate()/PagePrivate().
> But these are "atomic" operation and looks very slow.
> This is why I doesn't used these macros in this version.
> 
> My previous version, which used set_bit/test_bit/clear_bit, shows very bad performance
> on my test, and I replaced it.
> 
> If I made a mistake on measuring the performance and set_bit/test_bit/clear_bit
> is faster than what I think, I'd like to replace them.

Sorry, I misread your comment:

/* Atomic operation is needless here */

I read "needless" as "needed".  Would it make any more sense to you to
say "already have lock, don't need atomic ops", instead?

-- Dave

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)

From: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
To: Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel ML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	lhms <lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] [RFC] buddy allocator without bitmap  [2/4]
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:11:09 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1093561869.2984.360.camel@nighthawk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <412E6CC3.8060908@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 16:05, Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA wrote:
> I understand using these macros cleans up codes as I used them in my previous
> version.
> 
> In the previous version, I used SetPagePrivate()/ClearPagePrivate()/PagePrivate().
> But these are "atomic" operation and looks very slow.
> This is why I doesn't used these macros in this version.
> 
> My previous version, which used set_bit/test_bit/clear_bit, shows very bad performance
> on my test, and I replaced it.
> 
> If I made a mistake on measuring the performance and set_bit/test_bit/clear_bit
> is faster than what I think, I'd like to replace them.

Sorry, I misread your comment:

/* Atomic operation is needless here */

I read "needless" as "needed".  Would it make any more sense to you to
say "already have lock, don't need atomic ops", instead?

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2004-08-26 23:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-26 12:03 [RFC] buddy allocator without bitmap [2/4] Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-26 12:03 ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-26 15:50 ` [Lhms-devel] " Dave Hansen
2004-08-26 15:50   ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-26 23:05   ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-26 23:05     ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-26 23:11     ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2004-08-26 23:11       ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-26 23:28       ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-26 23:28         ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-27  0:18     ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-27  0:18       ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-27  0:27       ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-27  0:27         ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-27  4:48         ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-27  4:59           ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-27  5:20             ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-27  5:04           ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-27  5:31             ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
2004-08-27  5:31               ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-27  5:47           ` Dave Hansen
2004-08-27  6:09             ` Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1093561869.2984.360.camel@nighthawk \
    --to=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.