From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id m9G616n1007037 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:01:06 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E2512AC027 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:01:06 +0900 (JST) Received: from s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.98]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF1B12C046 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:01:05 +0900 (JST) Received: from s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5EB01DB8037 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:01:05 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s8.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865321DB803A for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:01:05 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: mm-more-likely-reclaim-madv_sequential-mappings.patch In-Reply-To: <20081016102752.9886.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20081015162232.f673fa59.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081016102752.9886.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20081016143830.582C.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:01:01 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, Johannes Weiner List-ID: > > I have a note here that this patch needs better justification. But the > > changelog looks good and there are pretty graphs, so maybe my note is stale. > > > > Can people please check it? > > > > Thanks. > > maybe, I can run benchmark it. > please wait few hour. 1. mesured various copy performance. using copybench -> http://code.google.com/p/copybench/ my machine mem: 8GB target file size: 10GB (filesize > system mem) 2.6.27 mmotm-1010: ============================================================== rw_cp 6:13 6:11 rw_fadv_cp 6:09 6:06 mm_sync_cp 5:51 5:55 mm_sync_madv_cp 5:59 5:57 mw_cp 5:50 5:50 mw_madv_cp 5:55 5:55 So, no improvement, but no regression. 2. Latency degression ratio of Sequential copy v.s. Other I/O situation run following script (mm_sync_madv_cp is one of copybench program) $ dbench -D /disk2/ -c client.txt 100 & $ sleep 100 $ time ./mm_sync_madv_cp src dst 2.6.27 mmotm-1010 ============================================================== mm_sync_madv_cp 6:14 6:02 (min:sec) dbench throughput 12.1507 14.6273 (MB/s) dbench latency 33046 21779 (ms) So, throughput improvement is relativily a bit, but latency improvement is much. Then, I think the patch can improve "larege file copy (e.g. backup operation) attacks desktop latency" problem. Any comments? Thanks. -- 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: email@kvack.org