From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:02:40 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: Fork timing numbers for shared page tables Message-ID: <20021010200240.GV10722@holomorphy.com> References: <167610000.1034278338@baldur.austin.ibm.com> <3DA5D893.CDD2407C@digeo.com> <175360000.1034279947@baldur.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <175360000.1034279947@baldur.austin.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave McCracken Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , Linux Memory Management List-ID: On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 02:59:07PM -0500, Dave McCracken wrote: > I ran this test in three cases, 2.5.41, 2.5.41-mm2 without share, and > 2.5.41-mm2 with share. > Now for the results (all times are in ms): Hrm, it'd be nice to see how nicely this does things for things like 500GB-sized processes on 64-bit boxen... Any chance you could pass this test along for randomized benchmark type stuff? Thanks, Bill -- 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/