From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:01:51 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/10] alternate 4-level page tables patches Message-ID: <20041219010151.GO771@holomorphy.com> References: <20041218095050.GC338@wotan.suse.de> <41C40125.3060405@yahoo.com.au> <20041218110608.GJ771@holomorphy.com> <41C411BD.6090901@yahoo.com.au> <20041218113252.GK771@holomorphy.com> <41C41ACE.7060002@yahoo.com.au> <20041218124635.GL771@holomorphy.com> <41C4C5C2.5000607@yahoo.com.au> <20041219002010.GN771@holomorphy.com> <41C4CDA0.5090504@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41C4CDA0.5090504@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andi Kleen , Linux Memory Management , Hugh Dickins , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton List-ID: On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 11:38:56AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: >> For clear_page_tables() you want to scan as little as possible. The William Lee Irwin III wrote: > Sure. I wonder if we could cut down the amount of scanning by keeping > track of what ranges of vmas have been unmapped... still, I don't think > I have seen this function high on a profile, so until then I personally > don't think I'll bother ;) Probably best to talk to davem about this. Or at least he's a source of information about this independent from me. William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> exit()-time performance issue is tlb_finish_mmu(). On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 11:38:56AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > Makes sense. I guess there is often a lot of memory one has to shoot > down. Also, some of the comments in the prior post relate to one of the differences in how I implemented all this. -- wli -- 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