Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751333AbWBVEJB (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 23:09:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751334AbWBVEJB (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 23:09:01 -0500 Received: from smtp101.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.211]:20370 "HELO smtp101.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751333AbWBVEJA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 23:09:00 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=oVXpCB4hEZHgygiuypuqUf97sLN732Kaj/lZeuLLBLgD9N541xbApr6ZoCGCYr8hcHzFWa7W8n/JceWvImDGbM+w47dHBSkbHxdpiDGardTcuM9RVk4kfTWS7tyRvodODG0MmtV/mQiaQl88sHl3qp3pEjU2hlMPk8pEstYAS/I= ; Message-ID: <43FBCE56.9020001@yahoo.com.au> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 13:37:10 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: clameter@engr.sgi.com, kiran@scalex86.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, shai@scalex86.org Subject: Re: [patch] Cache align futex hash buckets References: <20060220233242.GC3594@localhost.localdomain> <43FA8938.70006@yahoo.com.au> <43FBB2E8.2020300@yahoo.com.au> <20060221180845.79a44449.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060221180845.79a44449.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1304 Lines: 33 Andrew Morton wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: >>Instead of 1MB hash with 256 entries in it covering 256 cachelines, you >>have a 1MB hash with 65536(ish) entries covering 256 cachelines. >> > > > Good (if accidental point). Kiran, if you're going to gobble a megabyte, > you might as well use all of it and make the hashtable larger, rather than > just leaving 99% of that memory unused... > We chould probably also convert the list_head over to an hlist_head, for a modest saving in size (although that's more important from a cache footprint POV rather than improving cacheline bouncing). Although speaking of cacheline footprint: making the hash table so large will increase the "real" CPU cacheline footprint on your VSMP systems, so perhaps it is not always such an easy decision. Definitely for "normal" systems, we do not want to pad out to a single entry per cacheline, so the current patch can not go upstream as is. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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/