From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262778AbTDFDML (for ); Sat, 5 Apr 2003 22:12:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262780AbTDFDMK (for ); Sat, 5 Apr 2003 22:12:10 -0500 Received: from franka.aracnet.com ([216.99.193.44]:55455 "EHLO franka.aracnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262778AbTDFDMK (for ); Sat, 5 Apr 2003 22:12:10 -0500 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 19:23:27 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Andrew Morton , andrea@suse.de, mingo@elte.hu, hugh@veritas.com, dmccr@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: objrmap and vmtruncate Message-ID: <72740000.1049599406@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <20030405040614.66511e1e.akpm@digeo.com> References: <20030404163154.77f19d9e.akpm@digeo.com><12880000.1049508832@flay><20030405024414.GP16293@dualathlon.random><20030404192401.03292293.akpm@digeo.com> <20030405040614.66511e1e.akpm@digeo.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The first test has 100 tasks, each of which has 100 vma's. The 100 processes > modify their 100 vma's in a linear walk. Total working set is 240MB > (slightly more than is available). > > ./rmap-test -l -i 10 -n 100 -s 600 -t 100 foo > > 2.5.66-mm4: > 15.76s user 86.91s system 33% cpu 5:05.07 total > 2.5.66-mm4+objrmap: > 23.07s user 1143.26s system 87% cpu 22:09.81 total > 2.4.21-pre5aa2: > 14.91s user 75.30s system 24% cpu 6:15.84 total Isn't the intent to use sys_remap_file_pages for these sort of workloads anyway? In which case partial objrmap = rmap for these tests, so we're still OK? M.