Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 5 Apr 2003 19:55:01 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: objrmap and vmtruncate |
| |
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> wrote: > > > The first test has 100 tasks, each of which has 100 vma's. The 100 processes > > modify their 100 vma's in a linear walk. Total working set is 240MB > > (slightly more than is available). > > > > ./rmap-test -l -i 10 -n 100 -s 600 -t 100 foo > > > > 2.5.66-mm4: > > 15.76s user 86.91s system 33% cpu 5:05.07 total > > 2.5.66-mm4+objrmap: > > 23.07s user 1143.26s system 87% cpu 22:09.81 total > > 2.4.21-pre5aa2: > > 14.91s user 75.30s system 24% cpu 6:15.84 total > > Isn't the intent to use sys_remap_file_pages for these sort of workloads > anyway? In which case partial objrmap = rmap for these tests, so we're > still OK? >
remap_file_pages() would work OK for this, yes. Bit sad that an application which runs OK on 2.4 would need recoding to work acceptably under 2.5 though. - 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/
| |