From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753928AbYE3OaS (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 10:30:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751993AbYE3OaD (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 10:30:03 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:32942 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751900AbYE3OaB (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 10:30:01 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:29:17 -0400 From: Rik van Riel To: "John Stoffel" Cc: Andrew Morton , Lee Schermerhorn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, eric.whitney@hp.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, npiggin@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] Vm Pageout Scalability Improvements (V8) - continued Message-ID: <20080530102917.45cbca64@bree.surriel.com> In-Reply-To: <18496.1712.236440.420038@stoffel.org> References: <20080529195030.27159.66161.sendpatchset@lts-notebook> <20080529131624.60772eb6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080529162029.7b942a97@bree.surriel.com> <18496.1712.236440.420038@stoffel.org> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.10.4; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 30 May 2008 09:52:48 -0400 "John Stoffel" wrote: > I haven't seen any performance numbers talking about how well this > stuff works on single or dual CPU machines with smaller amounts of > memory, or whether it's worth using on these machines at all? > > The big machines with lots of memory and lots of CPUs are certainly > becoming more prevalent, but for my home machine with 4Gb RAM and dual > core, what's the advantage? > > Let's not slow down the common case for the sake of the bigger guys if > possible. I wouldn't call your home system with 4GB RAM "small". After all, the VM that Linux currently has was developed mostly on machines with less than 1GB of RAM and later encrusted in bandaids to make sure the large systems did not fail too badly. As for small system performance, I believe that my patch series should cause no performance regressions on those systems and has a framework that allows us to improve performance on those systems too. If you manage to break performance with my patch set somehow, please let me know so I can fix it. Something like the VM is very subtle and any change is pretty much guaranteed to break something, so I am very interested in feedback. -- All rights reversed. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:29:17 -0400 From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] Vm Pageout Scalability Improvements (V8) - continued Message-ID: <20080530102917.45cbca64@bree.surriel.com> In-Reply-To: <18496.1712.236440.420038@stoffel.org> References: <20080529195030.27159.66161.sendpatchset@lts-notebook> <20080529131624.60772eb6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080529162029.7b942a97@bree.surriel.com> <18496.1712.236440.420038@stoffel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: John Stoffel Cc: Andrew Morton , Lee Schermerhorn , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, eric.whitney@hp.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, npiggin@suse.de List-ID: On Fri, 30 May 2008 09:52:48 -0400 "John Stoffel" wrote: > I haven't seen any performance numbers talking about how well this > stuff works on single or dual CPU machines with smaller amounts of > memory, or whether it's worth using on these machines at all? > > The big machines with lots of memory and lots of CPUs are certainly > becoming more prevalent, but for my home machine with 4Gb RAM and dual > core, what's the advantage? > > Let's not slow down the common case for the sake of the bigger guys if > possible. I wouldn't call your home system with 4GB RAM "small". After all, the VM that Linux currently has was developed mostly on machines with less than 1GB of RAM and later encrusted in bandaids to make sure the large systems did not fail too badly. As for small system performance, I believe that my patch series should cause no performance regressions on those systems and has a framework that allows us to improve performance on those systems too. If you manage to break performance with my patch set somehow, please let me know so I can fix it. Something like the VM is very subtle and any change is pretty much guaranteed to break something, so I am very interested in feedback. -- All rights reversed. -- 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