Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:40:21 -0200 | From | Marcelo Tosatti <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/9] clockpro-clockpro.patch |
| |
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 11:43:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Peter,
I tried your "scan-shared.c" proggy which loops over 140M of a file using mmap (on a 128MB box). The number of loops was configured to "5".
The amount of major/minor pagefaults was exactly the same between vanilla and clockpro, isnt the clockpro algorithm supposed to be superior than LRU in such "sequential scan of MEMSIZE+1" cases?
Oh well, to be sincere, I still haven't understood what makes CLOCK-Pro use inter reference distance instead of recency, given that its a simple CLOCK using reference bits (but with three clocks instead of one).
But thats probably just my ignorance, need to study more.
- 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/
| |