Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch

• Next message: Andrew Walrond: "Re: /proc/cpuinfo shows only 2 processors on dual P4-Xeon system"
• Previous message: Greg KH: "Re: [PATCH 6/8] dm: allow slashes in dm device names"
• In reply to: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Next in thread: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Reply: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Reply: Gianni Tedesco: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 10:23:09AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> It actually seems a fraction slower (see systimes for Kernbench-16,
> for instance).

Can you play a bit with the hash table sizes? Perhaps double the
dcache hash and half the inode hash ?

I suspect it really just needs a better hash function. I'll cook
something up based on FNV hash.

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

• Next message: Andrew Walrond: "Re: /proc/cpuinfo shows only 2 processors on dual P4-Xeon system"
• Previous message: Greg KH: "Re: [PATCH 6/8] dm: allow slashes in dm device names"
• In reply to: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Next in thread: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Reply: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Reply: Gianni Tedesco: "Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] New dcache / inode hash tuning patch"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 28 2003 - 22:00:38 EST