From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760595AbXG0AjO (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:39:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760149AbXG0Ais (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:38:48 -0400 Received: from mail4.kite.se ([212.214.165.225]:45291 "EHLO mail4.kite.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757734AbXG0Air (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:38:47 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 618 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:38:47 EDT Message-ID: <46A93C2B.4080902@kite.se> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:28:27 +0200 From: Magnus Naeslund User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070716) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Al Boldi CC: Ray Lee , "david@lang.hm" , Nick Piggin , Jesper Juhl , Andrew Morton , ck list , Ingo Molnar , Paul Jackson , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <2c0942db0707250855v414cd72di1e859da423fa6a3a@mail.gmail.com> <200707252316.01021.a1426z@gawab.com> In-Reply-To: <200707252316.01021.a1426z@gawab.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Al Boldi wrote: > > Thanks for asking. I'm rather surprised why nobody's noticing any of this > slowdown. To be fair, it's not really a regression, on the contrary, 2.4 is > lot worse wrt swapin and swapout, and Rik van Riel even considers a 50% > swapin slowdown wrt swapout something like better than expected (see thread > '[RFC] kswapd: Kernel Swapper performance'). He probably meant random > swapin, which seems to offer a 4x slowdown. > Sorry for the late reply. Well I think I reported this or another swap/tmpfs performance issue earlier ( http://marc.info/?t=116542915700004&r=1&w=2 ), we got the suggestion to increase /proc/sys/vm/page-cluster to 5, but we never came around to try it. Maybe this was the reason for my report to be almost entirely ignored, sorry for that. Regards, Magnus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <46A93C2B.4080902@kite.se> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:28:27 +0200 From: Magnus Naeslund MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <2c0942db0707250855v414cd72di1e859da423fa6a3a@mail.gmail.com> <200707252316.01021.a1426z@gawab.com> In-Reply-To: <200707252316.01021.a1426z@gawab.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Al Boldi Cc: Ray Lee , "david@lang.hm" , Nick Piggin , Jesper Juhl , Andrew Morton , ck list , Ingo Molnar , Paul Jackson , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Al Boldi wrote: > > Thanks for asking. I'm rather surprised why nobody's noticing any of this > slowdown. To be fair, it's not really a regression, on the contrary, 2.4 is > lot worse wrt swapin and swapout, and Rik van Riel even considers a 50% > swapin slowdown wrt swapout something like better than expected (see thread > '[RFC] kswapd: Kernel Swapper performance'). He probably meant random > swapin, which seems to offer a 4x slowdown. > Sorry for the late reply. Well I think I reported this or another swap/tmpfs performance issue earlier ( http://marc.info/?t=116542915700004&r=1&w=2 ), we got the suggestion to increase /proc/sys/vm/page-cluster to 5, but we never came around to try it. Maybe this was the reason for my report to be almost entirely ignored, sorry for that. Regards, Magnus -- 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