![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Daniel Phillips writes: > The way I see it, the purpose of lazy page table instantiation is to > overcome objections to the reverse pte mapping vm technique that > have been expressed in the past, namely the slowdown in dup_mmap > inside fork. I.e., if rmap slows down fork then Linus and Davem are > going to veto it, as they've done in the past, because they feel > that the as-yet-unproven advantages of physically-based vm scanning > doesn't outweigh the easily measurable fork overhead. Personally, I > think that's debatable, but by eliminating the overhead we eliminate > the objection, and as far as I know, it's the only serious > objection. Will lazy page table instantiation speed up fork(2) without rmap? If so, then you've got a problem, because rmap will still be slower than non-rmap. Linus will happily grab any speedup and make that the new baseline against which new schemes are compared :-) Regards, Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca - 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:15 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||