Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265971AbUIIXRG (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 19:17:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266582AbUIIXRG (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 19:17:06 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:18382 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265971AbUIIXRD (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 19:17:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 16:20:48 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Marcelo Tosatti Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cacheline align pagevec structure Message-Id: <20040909162048.602ef511.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20040909214113.GB5723@logos.cnet> References: <20040909163929.GA4484@logos.cnet> <20040909154906.57f9391b.akpm@osdl.org> <20040909214113.GB5723@logos.cnet> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 781 Lines: 20 Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > I think the patch make sense, but I'm very sceptical about the benchmarks > > ;) > > Why's that? You think changing to the number of pages in the pagevec to "15" instead > "16" is the cause? Nope. I wouldn't have expected to see a significant (or even measurable) change in performance as a result of this patch. After all, these structures are always stack-allocated, and top-of-stack is most always in L1 cache. I'd suspect that benchmark variability is the cause here. - 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/