From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH, netfilter] NUMA aware ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 19:48:54 +0200 Message-ID: <200509191948.55333.ak@suse.de> References: <432EF0C5.5090908@cosmosbay.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: Eric dumazet In-Reply-To: <432EF0C5.5090908@cosmosbay.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Monday 19 September 2005 19:09, Eric dumazet wrote: > Hi > > Part of the performance problem we have with netfilter is memory > allocation is not NUMA aware, but 'only' SMP aware. How do you know? Did you measure it somehow? Normally I would expect fire wall state to mostly fit into caches (1MB+) of modern Opterons and other NUMA systems. > What do you think of this patch ? > > Note : The allocation function is quite complex (copied from > drivers/pci/pci-driver.c pci_call_probe()) > because current kernel doesnt have a NUMA aware vmalloc() wrapper Normal vmalloc is NUMA aware and allocates on the local node. Like all memory allocations > , maybe > a future kernel will export > such a common function ? BTW if you want to put data onto a specific node you don't need to schedule there - it is enough to set the process mempolicy with sys_set_mempolicy. This is fine from kernel too, as long as you save/restore the old one (current->mempolicy) -Andi >