On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 21:19:06 -0500 (CDT) Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Andrew Morton wrote: > [...] > > Keeping them in -next is not a problem - I was wondering about when to > > start moving the code into mainline. > > When Mr. Brouer has confirmed that the stuff actually does some good for > his issue. I plan to pickup working on this from Monday. (As Christoph already knows, I've just moved back to Denmark from New Zealand.) I'll start with micro benchmarking, to make sure bulk-alloc is faster than normal-alloc. Once we/I have some framework, we can easier compare the different optimizations that Christoph is planning. The interesting step for me is using this in the networking stack. For real use-cases, like IP-forwarding, my experience tells me that the added code size can easily reduce the performance gain, because of more instruction-cache misses. Fortunately bulk-alloc is call less-times, which amortize these icache-misses, but still something we need to be aware of as it will not show-up in micro benchmarking. ps. Thanks for the work guys! :-) -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>