Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?

Ed Tomlinson
2005-12-21T12:44:54Z

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 04:11, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> (x86_64 : PAGE_SIZE = 4096, L1_CACHE_BYTES = 64)
>
> On my machines, I can say that the 32 and 192 sizes could be avoided in favor
> in spending less cpu cycles in __find_general_cachep()
>
> Could some of you post the result of the following command on your machines :
>
> # grep "size-" /proc/slabinfo |grep -v DMA|cut -c1-40
size-131072 0 0 131072
size-65536 3 3 65536
size-32768 0 0 32768
size-16384 3 3 16384
size-8192 28 28 8192
size-4096 184 184 4096
size-2048 272 272 2048
size-1024 300 300 1024
size-512 275 376 512
size-256 717 720 256
size-192 1120 1220 192
size-64 7720 8568 64
size-128 45019 65830 128
size-32 1627 3333 32

amd64 up

Ed Tomlinson