From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765849AbYD2QFa (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:05:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752311AbYD2QFT (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:05:19 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:48028 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756751AbYD2QFS (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:05:18 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=OXdO82Vb5z5lDJuD3D4uAlTBLGzbsNsrefc8XQdJ1ciUFP/vqWUFq4sFGQiMB0Piz hdjgIgW1kCpOyqjetfOzQ== Message-ID: Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:05:12 -0400 From: "Ross Biro" To: "Hugh Dickins" Subject: Re: Page Faults slower in 2.6.25-rc9 than 2.6.23 Cc: "Balbir Singh" , linux-mm@kvack.org, lkml , "Kamalesh Babulal" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <661de9470804290752w1dc0cfb3k72e81d828a45765e@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote: >> I'm checking 2.6.24 now. A quick run of 2.6.25-rc9 without fake numa >> showed no real change. > 2.6.24 is slower as well. I can't say for sure it's the full 10% without more work than it's worth. But it is definitely significantly slower than 2.6.23. Ross