Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:55:25 -0300 (BRT) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/13] misc fixes |
| |
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
> At some point, when the reverse map is as CPU efficient as we can make > it, we need to decide whether the remaining cost is worth the benefit. > I wonder how to do that.
On a system which isn't swapping, the pte_chain based reverse maps will never be worth it. However, it seems that well over 90% of Linux machines have data in swap ...
The object-based reverse maps K42 has should be a lot better than what's possible with pte_chains. In fact, it should be lower overhead than non-rmap Linux because it doesn't need to do refcounting on a page by page basis.
However, the object-based reverse mapping scheme is something to do after 2.5 development is done and 2.6 has more or less stabilised. The only relevance it has is the knowledge that we won't be stuck with pte_chains forever ;)
regards,
Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- 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/
| |