From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au,
hugh@veritas.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Hugh's alternate page fault scalability approach on 512p Altix
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 08:42:22 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0509070838240.21170@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20660000.1126103324@[10.10.2.4]>
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> > Anticipatory prefaulting raises the highest fault rate obtainable three-fold
> > through gang scheduling faults but may allocate some pages to a task that are
> > not needed.
>
> IIRC that costed more than it saved, at least for forky workloads like a
> kernel compile - extra cost in zap_pte_range etc. If things have changed
> substantially in that path, I guess we could run the numbers again - has
> been a couple of years.
Right. The costs come about through wrong anticipations installing useless
mappings. The patches that I posted have this feature off by default. Gang
scheduling can be enabled by modifying a value in /proc. But I guess the
approach is essentially dead unless others want this feature too. The
current page fault scalability approach should be fine for a couple of
years and who knows what direction mmu technology has taken then.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-07 16:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-06 18:31 Christoph Lameter
2005-09-07 14:28 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-09-07 15:42 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2005-09-07 18:19 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-09-15 12:54 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.62.0509070838240.21170@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mbligh@mbligh.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®