On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 09:42:45AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 06:06:39PM +0200, Mateusz Nosek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I performed simple benchmarks using custom kernel module with the code
> > fragment in question 'copy-pasted' in there in both versions. In case of 1k,
>
On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 06:06:39PM +0200, Mateusz Nosek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I performed simple benchmarks using custom kernel module with the code
> fragment in question 'copy-pasted' in there in both versions. In case of 1k,
> 10k and 100k iterations the average time for kzalloc version was 5.1 and
Hi,
I performed simple benchmarks using custom kernel module with the code
fragment in question 'copy-pasted' in there in both versions. In case of
1k, 10k and 100k iterations the average time for kzalloc version was 5.1
and for kmalloc 3.9, for each iterations number.
The time was measured us
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 01:43:21PM +0200, mateusznos...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Mateusz Nosek
>
> Most fields in struct pointed by 'subscriptions' are initialized explicitly
> after the allocation. By changing kzalloc to kmalloc the call to memset
> is avoided. As the only new code consists
From: Mateusz Nosek
Most fields in struct pointed by 'subscriptions' are initialized explicitly
after the allocation. By changing kzalloc to kmalloc the call to memset
is avoided. As the only new code consists of 2 simple memory accesses,
the performance is increased.
Signed-off-by: Mateusz Nose
5 matches
Mail list logo
