From: Seth Jennings <sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Robert Jennings <rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] zsmalloc improvements
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:16:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FFDD12B.1050909@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FFD2524.2050300@kernel.org>
On 07/11/2012 02:03 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Today, I tested zsmapbench in my embedded board(ARM).
> tlb-flush is 30% faster than copy-based so it's always not win.
> I think it depends on CPU speed/cache size.
After you pointed this out, I decided to test this on my
Raspberry Pi, the only ARM system I have that is open enough
for me to work with.
I pulled some of the cycle counting stuff out of
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v6.c. I've pushed that code to
the github repo.
git://github.com/spartacus06/zsmapbench.git
My results were in agreement with your findings. I got 2040
cycles/map for the copy method and 947 cycles/map for the
page-table method. I think memory speed is playing a big
roll in the difference.
I agree that the page-table method should be restored since
the performance difference is so significant on ARM, a
platform that benefits a lot from memory compression IMHO.
Still, the question remains how to implement the selection
logic, since not all archs that support the page-table
method will necessarily perform better with it.
Thanks,
Seth
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Seth Jennings <sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Robert Jennings <rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] zsmalloc improvements
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:16:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FFDD12B.1050909@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FFD2524.2050300@kernel.org>
On 07/11/2012 02:03 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Today, I tested zsmapbench in my embedded board(ARM).
> tlb-flush is 30% faster than copy-based so it's always not win.
> I think it depends on CPU speed/cache size.
After you pointed this out, I decided to test this on my
Raspberry Pi, the only ARM system I have that is open enough
for me to work with.
I pulled some of the cycle counting stuff out of
arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v6.c. I've pushed that code to
the github repo.
git://github.com/spartacus06/zsmapbench.git
My results were in agreement with your findings. I got 2040
cycles/map for the copy method and 947 cycles/map for the
page-table method. I think memory speed is playing a big
roll in the difference.
I agree that the page-table method should be restored since
the performance difference is so significant on ARM, a
platform that benefits a lot from memory compression IMHO.
Still, the question remains how to implement the selection
logic, since not all archs that support the page-table
method will necessarily perform better with it.
Thanks,
Seth
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-11 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-02 21:15 [PATCH 0/4] zsmalloc improvements Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` [PATCH 1/4] zsmalloc: remove x86 dependency Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-10 2:21 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-10 2:21 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-10 15:29 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-10 15:29 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 7:27 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 7:27 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 18:26 ` Nitin Gupta
2012-07-11 18:26 ` Nitin Gupta
2012-07-11 20:32 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 20:32 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 22:42 ` Nitin Gupta
2012-07-11 22:42 ` Nitin Gupta
2012-07-12 0:23 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-12 0:23 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] zsmalloc: add single-page object fastpath in unmap Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-10 2:25 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-10 2:25 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-02 21:15 ` [PATCH 3/4] zsmalloc: add details to zs_map_object boiler plate Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-10 2:35 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-10 2:35 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-10 15:17 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-10 15:17 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 7:42 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 7:42 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 14:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 14:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-12 1:15 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-12 1:15 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-12 19:54 ` Dan Magenheimer
2012-07-12 19:54 ` Dan Magenheimer
2012-07-12 22:46 ` Dan Magenheimer
2012-07-12 22:46 ` Dan Magenheimer
2012-07-02 21:15 ` [PATCH 4/4] zsmalloc: add mapping modes Seth Jennings
2012-07-02 21:15 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-04 5:33 ` [PATCH 0/4] zsmalloc improvements Minchan Kim
2012-07-04 5:33 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-04 20:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-07-04 20:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-07-06 15:07 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-06 15:07 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-09 13:58 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-09 13:58 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 19:42 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-07-11 19:42 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-07-11 20:48 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 20:48 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-12 10:40 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-07-12 10:40 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-07-11 7:03 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 7:03 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 14:00 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-11 14:00 ` Seth Jennings
2012-07-12 1:01 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-12 1:01 ` Minchan Kim
2012-07-11 19:16 ` Seth Jennings [this message]
2012-07-11 19:16 ` Seth Jennings
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FFDD12B.1050909@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
--cc=rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.