[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: objrmap and vmtruncate
    "Martin J. Bligh" <> wrote:
    > > objrmap does not seem to help. Page clustering might, but is unlikely to
    > > be enabled on the machines which actually care about the overhead.
    > eh? Not sure what you mean by that. It helped massively ...
    > diffprofile from kernbench showed:
    > -4666 -74.9% page_add_rmap
    > -10666 -92.0% page_remove_rmap
    > I'd say that about an 85% reduction in cost is pretty damned fine ;-)
    > And that was about a 20% overall reduction in the system time for the
    > test too ... that was all for partial objrmap (file backed, not anon).

    In the test I use (my patch management scripts, which is basically bash
    forking its brains out) objrmap reclaims only 30-50% of the rmap CPU

    Maybe you had a very high sharing level.
    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 13:34    [W:3.119 / U:33.200 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site