Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: large page patch (fwd) (fwd) | Date | Fri, 9 Aug 2002 20:08:23 +0200 |
| |
On Friday 09 August 2002 18:31, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > On Friday 09 August 2002 17:56, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > Also, I think the jury (ie Andrew) is still out on whether rmap is worth > > > it. > > > > Tell me about it. Well, I feel strongly enough about it to spend the > > next week coding yet another pte chain optimization. > > Well yes, we've _seen_ that 2.4 -rmap improves system behaviour, > but we don't have any tools to _quantify_ that improvement. > > As long as the only measurable thing is the overhead (which may > get close to zero, but will never become zero) the numbers will > continue being against rmap. Not because of rmap, but just > because the overhead is the only thing being measured ;)
You know what to do, instead of moaning about it. Just code up a test load that blatantly favors rmap and post the results. In effect, that's what Andrew's 'doitlots' benchmark does, in the other direction.
-- Daniel - 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/
| |