From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753970AbZBALTW@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753970AbZBALTW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 1 Feb 2009 06:19:22 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753058AbZBALTN
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sun, 1 Feb 2009 06:19:13 -0500
Received: from mail-bw0-f12.google.com ([209.85.218.12]:55553 "EHLO
	mail-bw0-f12.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753028AbZBALTM (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 1 Feb 2009 06:19:12 -0500
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=ncjY4SY4H87kB8/hd/uBvdDVh11Wl22cqIUbNenndFCrJ4gLZvch4/fRl9ioPQcz+C
         SB1pQLs/GkffXHxyT+Udh3r72nwkD6ETJU50Xgi9Rcsx/E5noVfOTIzaOylrG21cIB9F
         EDIBiAZUONPd3zDEDmiAoKW62/IxpQY5x+EnY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20090129141929.GP24391@elte.hu>
References: <8c5a844a0901220851g1c21169al4452825564487b9a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0901221658550.14302@blonde.anvils>
	 <8c5a844a0901221500m7af8ff45v169b6523ad9d7ad3@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20090122231358.GA27033@elte.hu>
	 <8c5a844a0901230310h7aa1ec83h60817de2b36212d8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <8c5a844a0901281331w4cea7ab2y305d5a1af96e313e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20090129141929.GP24391@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 13:19:10 +0200
Message-ID: <8c5a844a0902010319t20b853d0t6c156ecc84543f30@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.28 1/2] memory: improve find_vma
From: Daniel Lowengrub <lowdanie@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 1/29/09, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> Here's an mmap performance tester:
>
>    http://redhat.com/~mingo/misc/mmap-perf.c
>
> maybe that shows a systematic effect. If you've got a Core2 based
> test-system then you could try perfstat as well, for much more precise
> instruction counts. (can give you more info about how to do that if you
> have such a test-system.)
>
>        Ingo
>
I compiled mmap-perf.c an ran it with ./mmap-perf 1 (not as root, does
that matter?).  As obvious from the code, the output that I got was
the final state of the /proc/[self]/maps file.  How does this
information tell me about performance?  Anyhow, here're the first 10
lines of the [heap] part of the output using the standard kernel:
0965b000-0967c000 rw-p 0965b000 00:00 0          [heap]
86007000-86009000 rw-p 86007000 00:00 0
86009000-8600a000 ---p 86009000 00:00 0
86018000-8601b000 rw-p 86018000 00:00 0
8601c000-86023000 -w-p 8601c000 00:00 0
86023000-86026000 rw-p 86023000 00:00 0
86026000-86029000 r--p 86026000 00:00 0
8603e000-86040000 rw-p 8603e000 00:00 0
86048000-8604c000 r--p 86048000 00:00 0
8604f000-86054000 ---p 8604f000 00:00 0
and here're the first 10 lines of the output with the patch applied:
09596000-095b7000 rw-p 09596000 00:00 0          [heap]
860ab000-860ad000 rw-p 860ab000 00:00 0
860ad000-860ae000 ---p 860ad000 00:00 0
860bc000-860bf000 rw-p 860bc000 00:00 0
860c0000-860c7000 -w-p 860c0000 00:00 0
860c7000-860ca000 rw-p 860c7000 00:00 0
860ca000-860cd000 r--p 860ca000 00:00 0
860e2000-860e4000 rw-p 860e2000 00:00 0
860ec000-860f0000 r--p 860ec000 00:00 0
860f3000-860f8000 ---p 860f3000 00:00 0
I can't see how this can show performance differences but I'm not sure
what other
part of the output is relevant.  Should I run it with some other options?
Thanks,
Daniel