On 12/22/2015 10:08 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2015, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> Why would you use zeros? The point is just to clear the information right?
>>> The regular poisoning does that.
>>
>> It then allows you to avoid the zeroing at allocation time.
>
> Well much of the code is expecting a zeroed object from the allocator and
> its zeroed at that time. Zeroing makes the object cache hot which is an
> important performance aspect.
Yes, modifying this behavior has a performance impact. It absolutely
needs to be evaluated, and I wouldn't want to speculate too much on how
good or bad any of the choices are.
Just to reiterate, I think we have 3 real choices here:
1. Zero at alloc, only when __GFP_ZERO
(behavior today)
2. Poison at free, also Zero at alloc (when __GFP_ZERO)
(this patch's proposed behavior, also what current poisoning does,
doubles writes)
3. Zero at free, *don't* Zero at alloc (when __GFP_ZERO)
(what I'm suggesting, possibly less perf impact vs. #2)
--
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>