Skip to content
Commit c2452f32 authored by Nick Piggin's avatar Nick Piggin Committed by Al Viro
Browse files

shrink struct dentry



struct dentry is one of the most critical structures in the kernel. So it's
sad to see it going neglected.

With CONFIG_PROFILING turned on (which is probably the common case at least
for distros and kernel developers), sizeof(struct dcache) == 208 here
(64-bit). This gives 19 objects per slab.

I packed d_mounted into a hole, and took another 4 bytes off the inline
name length to take the padding out from the end of the structure. This
shinks it to 200 bytes. I could have gone the other way and increased the
length to 40, but I'm aiming for a magic number, read on...

I then got rid of the d_cookie pointer. This shrinks it to 192 bytes. Rant:
why was this ever a good idea? The cookie system should increase its hash
size or use a tree or something if lookups are a problem. Also the "fast
dcookie lookups" in oprofile should be moved into the dcookie code -- how
can oprofile possibly care about the dcookie_mutex? It gets dropped after
get_dcookie() returns so it can't be providing any sort of protection.

At 192 bytes, 21 objects fit into a 4K page, saving about 3MB on my system
with ~140 000 entries allocated. 192 is also a multiple of 64, so we get
nice cacheline alignment on 64 and 32 byte line systems -- any given dentry
will now require 3 cachelines to touch all fields wheras previously it
would require 4.

I know the inline name size was chosen quite carefully, however with the
reduction in cacheline footprint, it should actually be just about as fast
to do a name lookup for a 36 character name as it was before the patch (and
faster for other sizes). The memory footprint savings for names which are
<= 32 or > 36 bytes long should more than make up for the memory cost for
33-36 byte names.

Performance is a feature...

Signed-off-by: default avatarAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
parent e2b689d8
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment