| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:13:02 +0200 |
| Cc: | ak@xxxxxxx, sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, xerox@xxxxxxxxxx, fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030609.030334.02284330.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20030609081803.GF20613@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030609.020116.10308258.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <20030609094734.GD2728@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030609.030334.02284330.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 03:03:34AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:47:34 +0200 > > gcc will generate a lot better code for the memsets if you can tell > it somehow they are long aligned and a multiple of 8 bytes. > > True, but the real bug is that we're initializing any of this > crap here at all. Right now we write over the same cachelines > 3 or so times. It should really just happen once. It's unlikely to be the reason for the profile hit on a modern x86. They are all really fast at reading/writing L1. More likely it is the cache miss for fetching the lines initially. Perhaps it is cache thrashing the dst_entry heads. Adding a strategic prefetch somewhere early may help a lot. -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |