From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] mremap: add MREMAP_NOHOLE flag --resend Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 22:22:46 -0700 Message-ID: <20150318222246.bc608dd0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20150318153100.5658b741277f3717b52e42d9@linux-foundation.org> <20150319050826.GA1591708@devbig257.prn2.facebook.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150319050826.GA1591708-XA4dbxeItU7BTsLV8vAZyg2O0Ztt9esIQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Shaohua Li Cc: linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, danielmicay-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Rik van Riel , Hugh Dickins , Mel Gorman , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Andy Lutomirski List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 22:08:26 -0700 Shaohua Li wrote: > > Daniel also had microbenchmark testing results for glibc and jemalloc. > > Can you please do this? > > I run Daniel's microbenchmark too, and not surprise the result is > similar: > glibc: 32.82 > jemalloc: 70.35 > jemalloc+mremap: 33.01 > tcmalloc: 68.81 > > but tcmalloc doesn't support mremap currently, so I cant test it. But Daniel's changelog implies strongly that tcmalloc would benefit from his patch. Was that inaccurate or is this a difference between his patch and yours?