Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:28:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:28:06 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:39186 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:28:05 -0500 To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: jasonp@boo.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] page coloring for 2.5.59 kernel, version 1 References: <3.0.6.32.20030127224726.00806c20@boo.net.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <884740000.1043737132@titus.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <20030128071313.GH780@holomorphy.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <1466000000.1043770007@titus.suse.lists.linux.kernel> From: Andi Kleen Date: 28 Jan 2003 17:37:25 +0100 In-Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh"'s message of "28 Jan 2003 17:09:52 +0100" Message-ID: Lines: 18 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Martin J. Bligh" writes: > > I think this one really needs to be done with the userspace cache > > thrashing microbenchmarks. > > If a benefit cannot be show on some sort of semi-realistic workload, > it's probably not worth it, IMHO. The main advantage of cache coloring normally is that benchmarks should get stable results. Without it a benchmark result can vary based on random memory allocation patterns. Just having stable benchmarks may be worth it. I suspect the benefit will vary a lot based on the CPU. Your caches may have good enough associativity. On other CPUs it may make much more difference. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/