>the wrong solution: to change HASH_BITS ad-hoc for one specific (big)
>memory size. This slows down the 4M-32M RAM range (both through wasting
>memory, and through having less cache-locality in that huge hashtable).
>Those small-memory boxes are very important to Linux as well.
I agree of course.
What you are missing is that most 2.3.x testers have at least 32mbyte of
ram and my only point is that it would be nice to set the HASH_BITS
optimal for most of testers until the autotuning feature will be merged.
Otherwise the majority will have to increase HASH_BITS to tune the kernel
for their system (as I had just to do).
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/