From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from digeo-nav01.digeo.com (digeo-nav01.digeo.com [192.168.1.233]) by packet.digeo.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA04673 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:16:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:17:01 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: 2.5.59-mm5 Message-Id: <20030125181701.312826e5.akpm@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <200301252043.09642.tomlins@cam.org> References: <20030123195044.47c51d39.akpm@digeo.com> <200301251534.32447.tomlins@cam.org> <20030125143343.2c505c93.akpm@digeo.com> <200301252043.09642.tomlins@cam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ed Tomlinson Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, green@namesys.com List-ID: Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > The excessive copy_foo_user times are still there with Oleg (and Chris's) patch > removed. Here is what I see doing: > > "apt-get install --reinstall squidguard chastity-list" > > (with file_write from my first message) > 55091 default_idle 1377.2750 > 62640 __copy_from_user_ll 1204.6154 > 33595 __copy_to_user_ll 646.0577 > > (without file_write) > 40259 __copy_from_user_ll 774.2115 > 18735 default_idle 468.3750 > 21524 __copy_to_user_ll 413.9231 > 386 system_call 8.0417 > 428 current_kernel_time 7.1333 Is this different from 2.5.59 base? It's beginning to look like copy_foo_user() itself has gone silly. I don't know what's causing this, Ed. Could you please dig into it a little more? Does it happen with a bare `dd'? Or is it networking? etcetera... -- 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/