From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07ED8D003B for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:40:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:39:54 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [patch] mm/vmalloc: remove block allocation bitmap Message-ID: <20110420163954.GA7297@infradead.org> References: <20110414211656.GB1700@cmpxchg.org> <20110419093118.GB23041@csn.ul.ie> <20110419233905.GA2333@cmpxchg.org> <20110420094647.GB1306@csn.ul.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110420094647.GB1306@csn.ul.ie> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Nick Piggin , Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:46:47AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > It'd be interesting but for the purposes of this patch I think it > would be more useful to see the results of some benchmark that is vmap > intensive. Something directory intensive running on XFS should do the > job just to confirm no regression, right? A profile might indicate > how often we end up scanning the full list, finding it dirty and > calling new_vmap_block but even if something odd showed up there, > it would be a new patch. Note that the default mkfs.xfs options will not trigger any vmap calls at runtime. You'll need a filesystem with a large directory block size to trigger heavy vmap usage. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org