On Wed, 9 Sep 2015, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > Hmmm... Guess we need to come up with distinct version of kmalloc() for > > irq and non irq contexts to take advantage of that . Most at non irq > > context anyways. > > I agree, it would be an easy win. Do notice this will have the most > impact for the slAb allocator. > > I estimate alloc + free cost would save: > * slAb would save approx 60 cycles > * slUb would save approx 4 cycles > > We might consider keeping the slUb approach as it would be more > friendly for RT with less IRQ disabling. IRQ disabling it a mixed bag. Older cpus have higher latencies there and also virtualized contexts may require the hypervisor tracks the interrupt state. For recent intel cpus this is certainly a workable approach. -- 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>