Re: cloning the kernel - why long time in "Resolving 313037 deltas"

[Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 07:13:40PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> Maybe.  However the mmap() may occur on section of the pack file which 
> has just been written to in order to write even more, always to the same 
> file.  On Linux this is fast because the mmap'd data is likely to still 
> be in the cache.
> 
> I guess this could be turned into a malloc()/read()/free() with no 
> trouble.

Actually, depending on the size of the chunk, even on Linux
malloc/read/free can be faster than the mmap/munmap, because
mmap/munmap calls involve page table manipulations, and even on Linux
that is often slower or dead even with the memory copy involved with
using malloc/read.  Even when reading huge chunks of Canon Raw File
data at a time, I found (experimentally) that it was no faster to use
mmap() compared to read().  And for small chunks of data, malloc/read
will definitely win out over mmap(), since the page table operations
and resulting page faults completely trump the cost of copying the
bytes from the page cache to the read() buffer.