On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 09:28:46AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 6:22 AM Hui Su <sh_...@163.com> wrote: > > The reason to keep __memcg_kmem_[un]charge_page functions is that they > were called in the very hot path. Can you please check the performance > impact of your change and if the generated code is actually same or > different.
Hi, Shakeel: I objdump the mm/page_alloc.o and comapre them, it change the assemble code indeed. In fact, it change some code order, which i personally think won't have impact on performance. And i ran the ltp mm and conatiner test, it seems nothing abnormal. BUT i still want to check whether this change will have negative impact on perforance due to this change code was called in the very hot path like you said, AND saddly i did not find a way to quantify the impact on performance. Can you give me some suggestion about how to quantify the performance or some tool? Thanks.
