From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com,
clameter@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: RE: [RFC] - Kernel text replication on IA64
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 17:48:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4t153d$ofhg7@azsmga001.ch.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060420164111.GA18770@agluck-lia64.sc.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060420135315.GA28021@sgi.com>
Luck, Tony wrote on Thursday, April 20, 2006 9:41 AM
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 08:53:16AM -0500, Jack Steiner wrote:
> > Enabling replication reserves 1 additional DTLB entry for kernel code.
> > This reduces the number of DTLB entries that is available for user code.
> > There is the potential that this could impact some applications.
> > Additional measurements are still needed.
>
> Ken's recent patch to free up the DTLB that is currently used for per-cpu
> data would mitigate this (though I'm sure he'll be unamused if I blow the
> 1.6% gain he saw on his transaction processing benchmark on this :-)
How much benefit is there to have readonly section replicated? Do you really
have to use two DTRs - one to map the readonly and one to map rw?
What about just replicate text so we don't need to burn an extra DTR?
- Ken
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com,
clameter@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: RE: [RFC] - Kernel text replication on IA64
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 10:48:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4t153d$ofhg7@azsmga001.ch.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060420164111.GA18770@agluck-lia64.sc.intel.com>
Luck, Tony wrote on Thursday, April 20, 2006 9:41 AM
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 08:53:16AM -0500, Jack Steiner wrote:
> > Enabling replication reserves 1 additional DTLB entry for kernel code.
> > This reduces the number of DTLB entries that is available for user code.
> > There is the potential that this could impact some applications.
> > Additional measurements are still needed.
>
> Ken's recent patch to free up the DTLB that is currently used for per-cpu
> data would mitigate this (though I'm sure he'll be unamused if I blow the
> 1.6% gain he saw on his transaction processing benchmark on this :-)
How much benefit is there to have readonly section replicated? Do you really
have to use two DTRs - one to map the readonly and one to map rw?
What about just replicate text so we don't need to burn an extra DTR?
- Ken
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-20 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-20 13:53 [RFC] - Kernel text replication on IA64 Jack Steiner
2006-04-20 13:53 ` Jack Steiner
2006-04-20 16:41 ` Luck, Tony
2006-04-20 16:41 ` Luck, Tony
2006-04-20 17:48 ` Chen, Kenneth W [this message]
2006-04-20 17:48 ` Chen, Kenneth W
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='4t153d$ofhg7@azsmga001.ch.intel.com' \
--to=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.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.