[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 01:12:55PM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> >> Because you don't set up and tear down the rmap pte-chains for every
> >> fault in / delete of any page ... it just works off the vmas.
> >
> > so basically it uses the rmap that we always had since at least 2.2 for
> > everything but anon mappings, right? this is what DaveM did a few years
> > back too. This makes lots of sense to me, so at least we avoid the
> > duplication of rmap information, even if it won't fix the anonymous page
> > overhead, but clearly it's much lower cost for everything but anonymous
> > pages.
> Right ... and anonymous chains are about 95% single-reference (at least for
> the case I looked at), so they're direct mapped from the struct page with
> no chain at all. Cuts out something like 95% of the space overhead of
> pte-chains, and 65% of the time (for kernel compile -j256 on 16x system).
> However, it's going to be a little more expensive to *use* the mappings,
> so we need to measure that carefully.

Sure, it is more expensive to use them, but all we care about is
complexity, and they solve the complexity problem just fine, so I
definitely prefer it. Cpu utilization during heavy swapping isn't a big
deal IMHO

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.113 / U:1.500 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site