Re: Experiences with slub bulk use-case for network stack

2015-09-17 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:13:25 -0500 (CDT) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > > > > Hint, this leads up to discussing if current bulk *ALLOC* API need to > > be changed... > > > > Alex and I have been working hard on practical

Re: Experiences with slub bulk use-case for network stack

2015-09-17 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > What I'm proposing is keeping interrupts on, and then simply cmpxchg > e.g 2 slab-pages out of the SLUB allocator (which the SLUB code calls > freelist's). The bulk call now owns these freelists, and returns them > to the caller. The API

Experiences with slub bulk use-case for network stack

2015-09-16 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
Hint, this leads up to discussing if current bulk *ALLOC* API need to be changed... Alex and I have been working hard on practical use-case for SLAB bulking (mostly slUb), in the network stack. Here is a summary of what we have learned so far. Bulk free'ing SKBs during TX completion is a big

Re: Experiences with slub bulk use-case for network stack

2015-09-16 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > Hint, this leads up to discussing if current bulk *ALLOC* API need to > be changed... > > Alex and I have been working hard on practical use-case for SLAB > bulking (mostly slUb), in the network stack. Here is a summary of > what we have