From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 11:00:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC] Convert pgtable cache to slab Message-Id: <16750.23602.938088.880466@napali.hpl.hp.com> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 03:27:42 -0700, William Lee Irwin III said: wli> At some point in the comment, I wrote: William> Nice! I got reports that it would not be beneficial when I William> thought about going over this earlier. I suppose it's a William> small vindication of my methods to see the original William> objection contradicted here. =) wli> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 12:44:59AM -0700, David Mosberger wli> wrote: >> What was the original comment relative to? 2.4 or 2.6? In 2.6 >> we lost the PTE quick-list, which I think is where the big >> overhead came from. Right, Martin? wli> I don't recall much of the original comment, apart from that wli> someone said it had too much overhead. I may have presumed too wli> much when I presumed it was 2.6 OK, I don't think it was me, then. I do suspect the quick-list would be faster than slab but the difference is most likely in the noise and you can't argue with the code-size reduction. --david