On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Björn Steinbrink wrote: > > > > The results are here: > > > > http://people.redhat.com/srostedt/slub/results/slab.op > > http://people.redhat.com/srostedt/slub/results/slub.op > > Hm, you seem to be hitting the "another_slab" stuff in __slab_alloc > alot. I wonder if !node_match triggers too often. We always start with > the per cpu slab, if that one is on the wrong node, you'll always hit > that "another_slab" path.
Well, I commented out the node_match part and it got 100% worse. It took 30 seconds to complete. > > After searching for way too long (given that I have no clue about that > stuff anyway and just read the code out of curiousness), I noticed that > the the cpu_to_node stuff on x86_64 seems to be initialized to 0xff > (arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c), and Google brought me this dmesg output [1], > which, AFAICT, shows that the per cpu slab setup is done _before_ > cpu_to_node is correctly setup. That would lead to the per cpu slabs all > having node == 0xff, which looks pretty bad. I didn't check to see if the internal set up of the node is correct though. I can put in some debug to see what I get. > > Disclaimer: I read the slub/numa/$WHATEVER_I_SAW_THERE for the first > time, so this might be total bull ;-) Well I'm a newbie on NUMA stuff too. I just got lucky enough to be able to reserve this box ;-) -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
