All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	haveblue@us.ibm.com, Christoph Lameter <christoph@lameter.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove zone_mem_map
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:52:03 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43FBD1D3.109@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060221183306.3d467d14.akpm@osdl.org>

Andrew Morton wrote:
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> This patch removes zone_mem_map from zone.
>>  By this, (generic) page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page can use the same logic.
> 
> I assume this is dependent upon unify-pfn_to_page-*.patch?
> 
yes. sorry for forgetting to write it.

>>  This modifies page_to_pfn implementation. Could anyone do performance test on NUMA ?
> 
> Do you expect there to be NUMA performance problems?  If so, how do they
> arise and what sort of tests should be run?
> 
I don't expect it. But when I posted this before (as RFC), some persons
(Martin J. Bligh and Dave Hansen) had concerns about it.

I think the heaviest users of page_to_pfn() are the page allocator and
mk_pte(page_to_pfn(page), hogehoge).

So, tests like  "mmap -> touch all -> unmap" will be good test.

powerpc and ia64 is not a good test environment, because they don't use
page_to_pfn() of generic DISCONTIG definitions.

other NUMAs (i386, x86_64 etc..) will be good.

Thanks,
-- Kame


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	haveblue@us.ibm.com, Christoph Lameter <christoph@lameter.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove zone_mem_map
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:52:03 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43FBD1D3.109@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060221183306.3d467d14.akpm@osdl.org>

Andrew Morton wrote:
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> This patch removes zone_mem_map from zone.
>>  By this, (generic) page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page can use the same logic.
> 
> I assume this is dependent upon unify-pfn_to_page-*.patch?
> 
yes. sorry for forgetting to write it.

>>  This modifies page_to_pfn implementation. Could anyone do performance test on NUMA ?
> 
> Do you expect there to be NUMA performance problems?  If so, how do they
> arise and what sort of tests should be run?
> 
I don't expect it. But when I posted this before (as RFC), some persons
(Martin J. Bligh and Dave Hansen) had concerns about it.

I think the heaviest users of page_to_pfn() are the page allocator and
mk_pte(page_to_pfn(page), hogehoge).

So, tests like  "mmap -> touch all -> unmap" will be good test.

powerpc and ia64 is not a good test environment, because they don't use
page_to_pfn() of generic DISCONTIG definitions.

other NUMAs (i386, x86_64 etc..) will be good.

Thanks,
-- Kame

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2006-02-22  2:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-02-22  0:22 [PATCH] remove zone_mem_map KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-02-22  0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-02-22  2:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-22  2:33   ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-22  2:52   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2006-02-22  2:52     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-02-22  3:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-22  3:04   ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-22  3:25   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-02-22  3:25     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-02-22  3:41     ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-22  3:41       ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-22  3:52       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-02-22  3:52         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=43FBD1D3.109@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=christoph@lameter.com \
    --cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.