lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: objrmap and vmtruncate
    "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> 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
    overhead.

    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 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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.031 / U:0.444 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site