Re: Note describing poor dcache utilization under high memory pressure

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>]

On January 30, 2002 03:46 pm, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On January 30, 2002 10:07 am, Horst von Brand wrote:
> 
> > > But most of this will be lost on exec(2).
> 
> > > Also, it is my impression that
> > > the tree of _running_ processes isn't usually very deep (Say init --> X -->
> > > [Random processes] --> [compilations &c], this would make 5 or 6 deep, no
> > > more.
> 
> > Here's my tree - on a non-very-busy laptop.  Why is my X tree so much deeper?
> > I suppose if I was running java this would look considerably more interesting.
> 
> >      |-bash---bash---xinit-+-XFree86
> >      |                     `-xfwm-+-xfce---gnome-terminal-+-bash---pstree
> 
> It doesn't matter how deep the tree is, on exec() all
> previously shared page tables will be blown away.
> 
> In this part of the tree, I see exactly 2 processes
> which could be sharing page tables (the two bash
> processes).

Sure, your point is that there is no problem and the speed of rmap on fork
is not something to worry about?

-- 
Daniel