From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18496.4309.393775.511382@stoffel.org> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:36:05 -0400 From: "John Stoffel" Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] Vm Pageout Scalability Improvements (V8) - continued In-Reply-To: <20080530102917.45cbca64@bree.surriel.com> References: <20080529195030.27159.66161.sendpatchset@lts-notebook> <20080529131624.60772eb6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080529162029.7b942a97@bree.surriel.com> <18496.1712.236440.420038@stoffel.org> <20080530102917.45cbca64@bree.surriel.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rik van Riel Cc: John Stoffel , Andrew Morton , Lee Schermerhorn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, eric.whitney@hp.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, npiggin@suse.de List-ID: Rik> On Fri, 30 May 2008 09:52:48 -0400 Rik> "John Stoffel" wrote: >> I haven't seen any performance numbers talking about how well this >> stuff works on single or dual CPU machines with smaller amounts of >> memory, or whether it's worth using on these machines at all? >> >> The big machines with lots of memory and lots of CPUs are certainly >> becoming more prevalent, but for my home machine with 4Gb RAM and dual >> core, what's the advantage? >> >> Let's not slow down the common case for the sake of the bigger guys if >> possible. Rik> I wouldn't call your home system with 4GB RAM "small". *grin* me either in some ways. But my other main linux box, which acts as an NFS server has 2Gb of RAM, but a pair of PIII Xeons at 550mhz. This is the box I'd be worried about in some ways, since it handles a bunch of stuff like backups, mysql, apache, NFS server, etc. Rik> After all, the VM that Linux currently has was developed mostly Rik> on machines with less than 1GB of RAM and later encrusted in Rik> bandaids to make sure the large systems did not fail too badly. Sure, I understand. Rik> As for small system performance, I believe that my patch series Rik> should cause no performance regressions on those systems and has Rik> a framework that allows us to improve performance on those Rik> systems too. Great! It would be nice to just be able to track this nicely. Rik> If you manage to break performance with my patch set somehow, Rik> please let me know so I can fix it. Something like the VM is Rik> very subtle and any change is pretty much guaranteed to break Rik> something, so I am very interested in feedback. What are you using to test/benchmark your changes as you develop this patchset? What would you suggest as a test load to help check performance? John -- 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