All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for non power-of-two bucketsize
Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 20:41:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <464F44BD.3040209@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070519182123.GD19966@holomorphy.com>

William Lee Irwin III a écrit :
> On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 11:54:54AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> alloc_large_system_hash() is called at boot time to allocate space
>> for several large hash tables.
>> Lately, TCP hash table was changed and its bucketsize is not a
>> power-of-two anymore.
>> On most setups, alloc_large_system_hash() allocates one big page
>> (order > 0) with __get_free_pages(GFP_ATOMIC, order). This single
>> high_order page has a power-of-two size, bigger than the needed size.
>> We can free all pages that wont be used by the hash table.
>> On a 1GB i386 machine, this patch saves 128 KB of LOWMEM memory.
>> TCP established hash table entries: 32768 (order: 6, 393216 bytes)
> 
> The proper way to do this is to convert the large system hashtable
> users to use some data structure / algorithm  other than hashing by
> separate chaining.

No thanks. This was already discussed to death on netdev. To date, hash tables 
are a good compromise.

I dont mind losing part of memory, I prefer to keep good performance when 
handling 1.000.000 or more tcp sessions.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for non power-of-two bucketsize
Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 20:41:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <464F44BD.3040209@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070519182123.GD19966@holomorphy.com>

William Lee Irwin III a ecrit :
> On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 11:54:54AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> alloc_large_system_hash() is called at boot time to allocate space
>> for several large hash tables.
>> Lately, TCP hash table was changed and its bucketsize is not a
>> power-of-two anymore.
>> On most setups, alloc_large_system_hash() allocates one big page
>> (order > 0) with __get_free_pages(GFP_ATOMIC, order). This single
>> high_order page has a power-of-two size, bigger than the needed size.
>> We can free all pages that wont be used by the hash table.
>> On a 1GB i386 machine, this patch saves 128 KB of LOWMEM memory.
>> TCP established hash table entries: 32768 (order: 6, 393216 bytes)
> 
> The proper way to do this is to convert the large system hashtable
> users to use some data structure / algorithm  other than hashing by
> separate chaining.

No thanks. This was already discussed to death on netdev. To date, hash tables 
are a good compromise.

I dont mind losing part of memory, I prefer to keep good performance when 
handling 1.000.000 or more tcp sessions.

--
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:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-19 18:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-18  9:54 [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for non power-of-two bucketsize Eric Dumazet
2007-05-18  9:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-18 18:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-18 18:21   ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-19  8:37 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-19  8:37   ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-19 18:07   ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-19 18:07     ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-19 18:54     ` David Miller
2007-05-19 18:54       ` David Miller, Eric Dumazet
2007-05-19 20:36       ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-19 20:36         ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-19 18:21 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-19 18:21   ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-19 18:41   ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2007-05-19 18:41     ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-21  8:11     ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-21  8:11       ` William Lee Irwin III

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=464F44BD.3040209@cosmosbay.com \
    --to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.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.