Re: __GFP_REPEAT usage in fq_alloc_node

[Eric Dumazet]

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> I wonder what's that cause of the penalty (when accessing the vmapped
> area I suppose?) Is it higher risk of collisions cache misses within the
> area, compared to consecutive physical adresses?

I believe tests were done with 48 fq qdisc, each having 2^16 slots.
So I had 48 blocs,of 524288 bytes.

Trying a bit harder at setup time to get 128 consecutive pages got
less TLB pressure.