From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:40:20 -0200 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [PATCH]: 1/4 batch mark_page_accessed() Message-ID: <20041124104020.GA9777@logos.cnet> References: <16800.47044.75874.56255@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20041121131250.26d2724d.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041121131250.26d2724d.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Nikita Danilov , Linux-Kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 01:12:50PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Nikita Danilov wrote: > > > > Batch mark_page_accessed() (a la lru_cache_add() and lru_cache_add_active()): > > page to be marked accessed is placed into per-cpu pagevec > > (page_accessed_pvec). When pagevec is filled up, all pages are processed in a > > batch. > > > > This is supposed to decrease contention on zone->lru_lock. > > Looks sane, althought it does add more atomic ops (the extra > get_page/put_page). Some benchmarks would be nice to have. I'll run STP benchmarks as soon as STP is working again. -- 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