public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: clameter@sgi.com
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [patch 4/7] SLUB: Conform more to SLABs SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN behavior
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:07:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070426050934.252670624@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20070426050743.867613938@sgi.com

[-- Attachment #1: slub_hwalign --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2641 bytes --]

Currently SLUB is using a strict L1_CACHE_BYTES alignment if
SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN is specified. SLAB does not align to a cacheline if the
object is smaller than half of a cacheline. Small objects are then aligned
by SLAB to a fraction of a cacheline.

Make SLUB just forget about the alignment requirement if the object size
is less than L1_CACHE_BYTES. It seems that fractional alignments are no
good because they grow the object and reduce the object density in a cache
line needlessly causing additional cache line fetches.

If we are already throwing the user suggestion of a cache line alignment
away then lets do the best we can. Maybe SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN also needs
to be tossed given its wishy-washy handling but doing so would require
an audit of all kmem_cache_allocs throughout the kernel source.

In any case one needs to explictly specify an alignment during
kmem_cache_create to either slab allocator in order to ensure that the
objects are cacheline aligned.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>

Index: linux-2.6.21-rc7-mm1/mm/slub.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.21-rc7-mm1.orig/mm/slub.c	2007-04-25 21:23:56.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.21-rc7-mm1/mm/slub.c	2007-04-25 21:23:59.000000000 -0700
@@ -1482,9 +1482,19 @@ static int calculate_order(int size)
  * various ways of specifying it.
  */
 static unsigned long calculate_alignment(unsigned long flags,
-		unsigned long align)
+		unsigned long align, unsigned long size)
 {
-	if (flags & SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN)
+	/*
+	 * If the user wants hardware cache aligned objects then
+	 * follow that suggestion if the object is sufficiently
+	 * large.
+	 *
+	 * The hardware cache alignment cannot override the
+	 * specified alignment though. If that is greater
+	 * then use it.
+	 */
+	if ((flags & SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN) &&
+			size > L1_CACHE_BYTES / 2)
 		return max_t(unsigned long, align, L1_CACHE_BYTES);
 
 	if (align < ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN)
@@ -1673,7 +1683,7 @@ static int calculate_sizes(struct kmem_c
 	 * user specified (this is unecessarily complex due to the attempt
 	 * to be compatible with SLAB. Should be cleaned up some day).
 	 */
-	align = calculate_alignment(flags, align);
+	align = calculate_alignment(flags, align, s->objsize);
 
 	/*
 	 * SLUB stores one object immediately after another beginning from
@@ -2250,7 +2260,7 @@ static struct kmem_cache *find_mergeable
 		return NULL;
 
 	size = ALIGN(size, sizeof(void *));
-	align = calculate_alignment(flags, align);
+	align = calculate_alignment(flags, align, size);
 	size = ALIGN(size, align);
 
 	list_for_each(h, &slab_caches) {

--

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-04-26  5:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-26  5:07 [patch 0/7] SLUB updates clameter
2007-04-26  5:07 ` [patch 1/7] SLUB: Remove duplicate VM_BUG_ON clameter
2007-04-26  5:07 ` [patch 2/7] SLAB: Fix sysfs directory handling clameter
2007-04-26  5:07 ` [patch 3/7] SLUB: debug printk cleanup clameter
2007-04-26  5:07 ` clameter [this message]
2007-04-26  5:07 ` [patch 5/7] SLUB: Add MIN_PARTIAL clameter
2007-04-26  5:07 ` [patch 6/7] SLUB: Free slabs and sort partial slab lists in kmem_cache_shrink clameter
2007-04-26  5:07 ` [patch 7/7] SLUB: Major slabinfo update clameter

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=20070426050934.252670624@sgi.com \
    --to=clameter@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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