lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call
    On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 09:43:59AM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
    > On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 07:24:24PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > >> So whole stole the remaining 1.85 seconds? Looks like pte_highmem.
    >
    > On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 06:17:27PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > > would you mind to add the line for 2.4.21-pre4aa3? it has pte-highmem so
    > > you can easily find it out for sure if it is pte_highmem that stole >10%
    > > of your fast cpu. A line for the 2.4-rmap patch would be also
    > > interesting.
    >
    > On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 07:24:24PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > >> Note one second spent in pte_alloc_one().
    >
    > On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 06:17:27PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > > note the seconds spent in the rmap affected paths too.
    >
    > The pagetable cache is gone in 2.5, so pte_alloc_one() takes the
    > bitblitting hit for pagetables.

    I'm talking about do_anonymous_page, do_wp_page, do_no_page fork and all
    the other places that introduces spinlocks (per-page) and allocations of
    2 pieces of ram rather than just 1 (and in turn potentially global
    spinlocks too if the cpu-caches are empty). Just grep for
    pte_chain_alloc or page_add_rmap in mm/memory.c, that's what I mean, I'm
    not talking about pagetables.

    Andrea
    -
    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 13:33    [W:4.613 / U:0.100 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site