Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Date: Tue Sep 08 2009 - 20:28:54 EST

Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: [PATCH RFC] char/tty_io: fix legacy pty name when more than 256pty devices are requested"
Previous message: John Reiser: "binfmt_elf PT_INTERP gets EFAULT if no PROT_WRITE"
In reply to: Felix Fietkau: "Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements"
Next in thread: David Miller: "Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> The TLB is SW loaded, yes. However it should not do any misses on kernel
> space, since the whole segment is in a wired TLB entry.

Including vmalloc space ?

Ben.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: [PATCH RFC] char/tty_io: fix legacy pty name when more than 256pty devices are requested"
Previous message: John Reiser: "binfmt_elf PT_INTERP gets EFAULT if no PROT_WRITE"
In reply to: Felix Fietkau: "Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements"
Next in thread: David Miller: "Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]