Re: Tomas Vondra
> If it's a reliable fix, then I guess we can do it like this. But won't
> that be a performance penalty on everyone? Or does the system split the
> array into 16-element chunks anyway, so this makes no difference?
There's still the overhead of the syscall itself. But no idea how
costly it is to have this 16-step loop in user or kernel space.
We could claim that on 32-bit systems, shared_buffers would be smaller
anyway, so there the overhead isn't that big. And the step size should
be larger (if at all) on 64-bit.
> Anyway, maybe we should start by reporting this to the kernel people. Do
> you want me to do that, or shall one of you take care of that? I suppose
> that'd be better, as you already wrote a fix / know the code better.
Submitted: https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=175077821909222&w=2
Christoph
