Re: RSS controller v2 Test results (lmbench )

[Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:20:12 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>A meaningful container size does not hamper performance. I am in the process
>>of getting more results (with varying container sizes). Please let me know
>>what you think of the results? Would you like to see different benchmarks/
>>tests/configuration results?
>>
>>Any feedback, suggestions to move this work forward towards identifying
>>and correcting bottlenecks or to help improve it is highly appreciated.
> 
> 
> <wakes up>
> 
> Memory reclaim tends not to consume much CPU.  Because in steady state it
> tends to be the case that the memory reclaim rate (and hopefully the
> scanning rate) is equal to the disk IO rate.

> Often the most successful way to identify performance problems in there is
> by careful code inspection followed by development of exploits.
> 
> Is this RSS controller built on Paul's stuff, or is it standalone?
it is based on Paul's patches.
 
> Where do we stand on all of this now anyway?  I was thinking of getting Paul's
> changes into -mm soon, see what sort of calamities that brings about.
I think we can merge Paul's patches with *interfaces* and then switch to
developing/reviewing/commiting resource subsytems.
RSS control had good feedback so far from a number of people
and is a first candidate imho.

Thanks,
Kirill

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>