On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> If we really want to avoid unnecessary access to "zone" while walking
> zonelist,
> above may do something good. Cons is this makes sizeof zonlist bigger.
The trouble is that the size of the zonelist would double with this
approach. We have long
On (12/09/07 16:51), KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki didst pronounce:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:31:27 +0100 (IST)
> Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Using two zonelists per node requires very frequent use of zone_idx(). This
> > is costly as it involves a lookup of another structure and a substraction
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:31:27 +0100 (IST)
Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using two zonelists per node requires very frequent use of zone_idx(). This
> is costly as it involves a lookup of another structure and a substraction
> operation. As struct zone is always word aligned and normally c
Using two zonelists per node requires very frequent use of zone_idx(). This
is costly as it involves a lookup of another structure and a substraction
operation. As struct zone is always word aligned and normally cache-line
aligned, the pointer values have a number of 0's at the least significant
b
Using two zonelists per node requires very frequent use of zone_idx(). This
is costly as it involves a lookup of another structure and a substraction
operation. As struct zone is always word aligned and normally cache-line
aligned, the pointer values have a number of 0's at the least significant
b
5 matches
Mail list logo
