From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@novell.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ZONE_PADDING wastes 4 bytes of the new cacheline
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 00:45:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041021224533.GB8756@dualathlon.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <417837A7.8010908@yahoo.com.au>
On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 08:26:47AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Uses the zero length array which seems to be quite abundant throughout
> the tree (although maybe that also causes problems when it is by itself
> in an array?).
then we could use this on the spinlock too to drop the #ifdef. It
doesn't really matter either ways, in practice it's the same.
> @@ -108,10 +108,7 @@ struct per_cpu_pageset {
> */
>
> struct zone {
> - /*
> - * Commonly accessed fields:
> - */
> - spinlock_t lock;
> + /* Fields commonly accessed by the page allocator */
> unsigned long free_pages;
> unsigned long pages_min, pages_low, pages_high;
> /*
> @@ -128,8 +125,18 @@ struct zone {
> */
> unsigned long protection[MAX_NR_ZONES];
>
> + struct per_cpu_pageset pageset[NR_CPUS];
> +
> + /*
> + * free areas of different sizes
> + */
> + spinlock_t lock;
> + struct free_area free_area[MAX_ORDER];
> +
> +
> ZONE_PADDING(_pad1_)
>
> + /* Fields commonly accessed by the page reclaim scanner */
> spinlock_t lru_lock;
> struct list_head active_list;
> struct list_head inactive_list;
> @@ -137,10 +144,8 @@ struct zone {
> unsigned long nr_scan_inactive;
> unsigned long nr_active;
> unsigned long nr_inactive;
> - int all_unreclaimable; /* All pages pinned */
> unsigned long pages_scanned; /* since last reclaim */
> -
> - ZONE_PADDING(_pad2_)
> + int all_unreclaimable; /* All pages pinned */
>
> /*
> * prev_priority holds the scanning priority for this zone. It is
> @@ -161,10 +166,9 @@ struct zone {
> int temp_priority;
> int prev_priority;
>
> - /*
> - * free areas of different sizes
> - */
> - struct free_area free_area[MAX_ORDER];
> +
> + ZONE_PADDING(_pad2_)
> + /* Rarely used or read-mostly fields */
>
> /*
> * wait_table -- the array holding the hash table
> @@ -194,10 +198,6 @@ struct zone {
> unsigned long wait_table_size;
> unsigned long wait_table_bits;
>
> - ZONE_PADDING(_pad3_)
> -
> - struct per_cpu_pageset pageset[NR_CPUS];
> -
> /*
> * Discontig memory support fields.
> */
> @@ -206,12 +206,13 @@ struct zone {
> /* zone_start_pfn == zone_start_paddr >> PAGE_SHIFT */
> unsigned long zone_start_pfn;
>
> + unsigned long spanned_pages; /* total size, including holes */
> + unsigned long present_pages; /* amount of memory (excluding holes) */
> +
> /*
> * rarely used fields:
> */
> char *name;
> - unsigned long spanned_pages; /* total size, including holes */
> - unsigned long present_pages; /* amount of memory (excluding holes) */
> } ____cacheline_maxaligned_in_smp;
looks reasonable. only cons is that this rejects on my tree ;), pages_*
and protection is gone in my tree, replaced by watermarks[] using the
very same optimal and proven algo of 2.4 (enabled by default of course).
I'll reevaluate the false sharing later on.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-21 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-21 1:17 ZONE_PADDING wastes 4 bytes of the new cacheline Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-21 3:10 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-21 4:36 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-21 4:53 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-21 10:51 ` Mikael Pettersson
2004-10-21 12:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-21 18:54 ` Adam Heath
2004-10-21 20:21 ` DaMouse
2004-10-21 21:24 ` Jon Masters
2004-10-22 10:09 ` DaMouse
2004-10-21 22:26 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-21 22:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2004-10-22 0:34 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-22 1:10 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-22 1:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-22 2:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-10-22 3:38 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-22 3:49 ` Jesse Barnes
2004-10-22 17:15 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-22 3:09 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-22 3:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-22 3:35 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-22 17:13 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-22 17:07 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-22 15:50 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-22 3:02 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-22 16:58 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-23 4:33 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-23 9:59 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-23 10:22 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-23 11:03 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-23 16:28 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-25 12:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-25 12:49 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-25 13:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-25 20:09 ` Robert White
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=20041021224533.GB8756@dualathlon.random \
--to=andrea@novell.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox