From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: Subtle MM bug References: Reply-To: zlatko@iskon.hr From: Zlatko Calusic Date: 17 Jan 2001 19:53:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: Rik van Riel's message of "Wed, 17 Jan 2001 15:48:39 +1100 (EST)" Message-ID: <87wvburowk.fsf@atlas.iskon.hr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rik van Riel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Rik van Riel writes: > > Second test: kernel compile make -j32 (empirically this puts the > > VM under load, but not excessively!) > > > > 2.2.17 -> make -j32 392.49s user 47.87s system 168% cpu 4:21.13 total > > 2.4.0 -> make -j32 389.59s user 31.29s system 182% cpu 3:50.24 total > > > > Now, is this great news or what, 2.4.0 is definitely faster. > > One problem is that these tasks may be waiting on kswapd when > kswapd might not get scheduled in on time. On the one hand this > will mean lower load and less thrashing, on the other hand it > means more IO wait. > Hm, if all tasks are waiting for memory, what is stopping kswapd to run? :) -- Zlatko -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/