From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:06:15 -0600 From: Robin Holt Subject: Re: page fault scalability patch V11 [0/7]: overview Message-ID: <20041120020615.GB20576@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> References: <419D581F.2080302@yahoo.com.au> <419D5E09.20805@yahoo.com.au> <1100848068.25520.49.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Nick Piggin , Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 11:42:39AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > Note that I have posted two other approaches of dealing with the rss problem: > > A. make_rss_atomic. The earlier releases contained that patch but then another > variable (such as anon_rss) was introduced that would have required additional > atomic operations. Atomic rss operations are also causing slowdowns on > machines with a high number of cpus due to memory contention. > > B. remove_rss. Replace rss with a periodic scan over the vm to determine > rss and additional numbers. This was also discussed on linux-mm and linux-ia64. > The scans while displaying /proc data were undesirable. Can you run a comparison benchmark between atomic rss and anon_rss and the sloppy rss with the rss and anon_rss in seperate cachelines. I am not sure that it is important to seperate the two into seperate lines, just rss and anon_rss from the lock and sema. If I have the time over the weekend, I might try this myself. If not, can you give it a try. Thanks, Robin -- 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: aart@kvack.org