From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com (mail-qa0-f47.google.com [209.85.216.47]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF166B0038 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 11:07:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id i13so4648307qae.6 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 08:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from service87.mimecast.com (service87.mimecast.com. [91.220.42.44]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b7si16762382qai.88.2014.07.25.08.07.22 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 08:07:22 -0700 (PDT) From: "Wilco Dijkstra" Subject: Background page clearing Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:06:51 +0100 Message-ID: <000001cfa81a$110d15c0$33274140$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-gb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: linux-mm@kvack.org Hi, I recently noticed how a Stream benchmark took 30% more time in the first i= teration due to having to clean pages in the output array. Especially clearing a huge page on a pagef= ault is a substantial overhead. It affects the cached data of the workload while it is running an= d reduces available memory bandwidth. Is there a reason Linux does not do background page clearing like other OSe= s to reduce this overhead? It would be a good fit for typical mobile workloads (bursts of hi= gh activity followed by periods of low activity). Wilco -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org