On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 02:48:37AM +0200, Rene Herman wrote: > On 07/19/2007 02:41 AM, Matt Mackall wrote: > > >On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 02:15:39AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > >>Using kmalloc(8k) instead of alloc_page() doesn't sound a too big deal > >>and that will solve the problem. > > > >How do you figure? > > > >If you're saying that soft pages helps our 8k stack allocations, it > >doesn't. The memory overhead of soft pages will be higher (5-15%, > >mostly due to file tails in pagecache) than the level at which 8k > >stacks currently run into trouble (1-2% free?). > > > >Not helpful. > > With tail-packing it is.
Tail packing is a whole new can of worms. Especially as it's very likely to make performance suffer on small files (the common case). On the other hand, if someone can demonstrate that tail-packed page cache doesn't suck, we should put it in mainline pronto. The poor architectures that are stuck with real 64k pages are sure to appreciate it. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - 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/