Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regression with tbench

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <nickpiggin@...>
Cc: <herbert@...>, <clameter@...>, <netdev@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 8:10 am

From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:02:11 +1100


Great, thanks for testing.  I'll apply Herbert's patch tomorrow
as I've already sent Linus a bug fix pull request tonight.


Yes, I wonder why too.  I bet objects just got packed differently.

There is this fugly "LOOPBACK_OVERHEAD" macro define in
drivers/net/loopback.c that is trying to figure out the
various overheads that we should subtract from the loopback
MTU we use by default.

It's almost guarenteed to be wrong for the way the allocators
work now.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Nick Piggin, (Fri Nov 9, 8:36 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Matt Mackall, (Mon Nov 12, 4:13 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Nick Piggin, (Tue Nov 13, 7:44 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Nov 9, 11:15 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2 slab vs slob tbench numbers, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Nov 9, 1:49 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Christoph Lameter, (Mon Nov 12, 3:44 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Christoph Lameter, (Wed Nov 14, 9:03 pm)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., David Miller, (Wed Nov 14, 8:10 am)
Re: 2.6.24-rc2: Network commit causes SLUB performance regre..., Christoph Lameter, (Wed Nov 14, 2:33 pm)