From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Feb  3 12:23:59 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32EF916A417
	for <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>;
	Sun,  3 Feb 2008 12:23:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E73F413C468
	for <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>;
	Sun,  3 Feb 2008 12:23:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87B21207F;
	Sun,  3 Feb 2008 13:04:49 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Tests: AWL
X-Spam-Learn: disabled
X-Spam-Score: -0.2/3.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no
Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180])
	by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65D77207E;
	Sun,  3 Feb 2008 13:04:49 +0100 (CET)
Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 405358449D; Sun,  3 Feb 2008 13:04:49 +0100 (CET)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
References: <47A25412.3010301@FreeBSD.org> <47A25A0D.2080508@elischer.org>
	<47A2C2A2.5040109@FreeBSD.org>
	<20080201185435.X88034@fledge.watson.org> <47A43873.40801@FreeBSD.org>
	<20080202095658.R63379@fledge.watson.org>
	<47A4E934.1050207@FreeBSD.org> <47A4F1AF.9090306@FreeBSD.org>
	<20080202224923.T66602@fledge.watson.org>
	<47A55209.9040106@elischer.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 13:04:48 +0100
In-Reply-To: <47A55209.9040106@elischer.org> (Julian Elischer's message of
	"Sat\, 02 Feb 2008 21\:32\:57 -0800")
Message-ID: <86ejbumejj.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>,
	Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>,
	freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Memory allocation performance
X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Performance/tuning <freebsd-performance.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance>,
	<mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance>,
	<mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 12:23:59 -0000

Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes:
> Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > be a good time to try to revalidate that.  Basically, the goal would
> > be to make the pcpu cache FIFO as much as possible as that maximizes
> > the chances that the newly allocated object already has lines in the
> > cache.  It's a fairly trivial tweak to the UMA allocation code.
> you mean FILO or LIFO right?

Uh, no.  You want to reuse the last-freed object, as it is most likely
to still be in cache.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no