From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:18:31 -0300 (BRT) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH] (2/2) reverse mappings for current 2.5.23 VM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Daniel Phillips Cc: Craig Kulesa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > 2.5.23-rmap (this patch -- "rmap-minimal"): > > > Total kernel swapouts during test = 24068 kB > > > Total kernel swapins during test = 6480 kB > > > Elapsed time for test: 133 seconds > > > > > > 2.5.23-rmap13b (Rik's "rmap-13b complete") : > > > Total kernel swapouts during test = 40696 kB > > > Total kernel swapins during test = 380 kB > > > Elapsed time for test: 133 seconds > You might conclude from the above that the lru+rmap is superior to > aging+rmap: while they show the same wall-clock time, lru+rmap consumes > considerably less disk bandwidth. Naturally, it would be premature to > conclude this from one trial on one load. On the contrary, aging+rmap shows a lot less swapins. The fact that it has more swapouts than needed means we need to fix one aspect of the thing (page_launder), it doesn't mean we should get rid of the whole thing. kind regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ -- 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/