On 25 February 2012 15:22, Christoph Egger christoph_eg...@gmx.de wrote:
On 25.02.12 10:29, Sad Clouds wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:58:45 +
Mindaugas Rasiukevicius rm...@netbsd.org wrote:
Brook Milligan br...@nmsu.edu wrote:
I understand that at least on the i386/amd64 ports CPUs are
Hi,
this splits the lookup table into two parts, for smaller allocations and
larger ones this has the following advantages:
- smaller lookup tables (less cache line pollution)
- makes large kmem caches possible currently up to min(16384, 4*PAGE_SIZE)
- smaller caches allocate from larger
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Lars Heidieker wrote:
Hi,
this splits the lookup table into two parts, for smaller allocations and
larger ones this has the following advantages:
- smaller lookup tables (less cache line pollution)
- makes large kmem caches possible currently up to min(16384,
For a number of reasons I decided to use ext2 filesystem on 60Gb memory
stick.
umass0 at uhub7 port 1 configuration 1 interface 0
umass0: JetFlash Mass Storage Device, rev 2.00/1.00, addr 2
umass0: using SCSI over Bulk-Only
scsibus0 at umass0: 2 targets, 1 lun per target
sd0
On 03/01/2012 06:04 PM, Eduardo Horvath wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Lars Heidieker wrote:
Hi,
this splits the lookup table into two parts, for smaller
allocations and larger ones this has the following advantages:
- smaller lookup tables (less cache line pollution) - makes large
kmem
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Lars Heidieker wrote:
On 03/01/2012 06:04 PM, Eduardo Horvath wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Lars Heidieker wrote:
Hi,
this splits the lookup table into two parts, for smaller
allocations and larger ones this has the following advantages:
- smaller lookup
On 03/01/2012 07:22 PM, Eduardo Horvath wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Lars Heidieker wrote:
On 03/01/2012 06:04 PM, Eduardo Horvath wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Lars Heidieker wrote:
Hi,
this splits the lookup table into two parts, for smaller
allocations and larger ones this has the