From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dbl.q-ag.de ([213.172.117.3]:7315 "EHLO dbl.q-ag.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270059AbUERFE0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 May 2004 01:04:26 -0400 Message-ID: <40A99944.8030500@colorfullife.com> Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 07:04:04 +0200 From: Manfred Spraul MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow arch override for kmem_bufctl_t References: <40A60984.1070202@colorfullife.com> <20040517141635.55101363.davem@redhat.com> <20040517212528.GY6484@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20040517212528.GY6484@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: "David S. Miller" , akpm@digeo.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Matthew Wilcox wrote: >On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 02:16:35PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > >>Just out of curiosity, which arch knowingly has the problem? >> >> > >I think it's ARM ... > > > I thought it was sparc and perhaps alpha, but I was wrong: it was a general comment from Mark Hemment (May 2000): > Making s_free a short will really hurt performance. So to does short > bufctls. Don't worry too much about wasting a little memory (internal > fragmentation) for performance. "shorts" are a performance hit (more > so on some architectures - Pentium Pros and definetly on true RISC). -- Manfred