On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 11:33:15AM +0000, yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, kernel objects may not be that small, but one would expect
> > the per-cpu parts of the kernel objects to be sometimes small, often down to
> > a couple of counters counting statistics.
>
>
> Doesn't your allocator increase chances of cache conflict on the same
> cpu ?
>
You mean by increasing the footprint and the chance of eviction ? It
is a compromise. Or you would face NR_CPUS bloat and non-NUMA-node-local
accesses for all CPUs outside the NUMA node where your NR_CPUS array
is located.
Thanks
-- Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com> http://lse.sourceforge.net Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India. - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 22:00:22 EST