Re: Results: pre6 vs pre6+zlatko's_patch vs pre5 vs arcavm13

Andrea Arcangeli
1999-01-11T19:38:15Z

On Mon, 11 Jan 1999, Steve Bergman wrote:

> Here are updated results including arcavm16:
>
>
> 116 Image test in 128MB:
>
> pre6+zlatko's_patch 2:35
> and with requested change 3:09
> pre6 2:27
> pre5 1:58
> arcavm13 9:13
> arcavm15 1:59
> pre-7 2:41
> arcavm16 1:54

Cool, now that arcavm16 (in pre6) is faster than pre5 I am courious to see
what will happens with the one liner patch below applyed on the top of
arcavm16 (maybe nothing but... ;). We can call the resulting code arcavm17
against pre6 (that pratically insteaed is arcavm16 applyed on pre5 ;).

Index: linux/mm/page_alloc.c
diff -u linux/mm/page_alloc.c:1.1.1.7 linux/mm/page_alloc.c:1.1.1.1.2.27
--- linux/mm/page_alloc.c:1.1.1.7 Sat Jan 9 12:58:25 1999
+++ linux/mm/page_alloc.c Mon Jan 11 19:57:07 1999
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@
{
int freed;
current->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC;
- freed = try_to_free_pages(gfp_mask, freepages.high - nr_free_pages);
+ freed = try_to_free_pages(gfp_mask, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX);
current->flags &= ~PF_MEMALLOC;
if (!freed && !(gfp_mask & (__GFP_MED | __GFP_HIGH)))
goto nopage;

Andrea Arcangeli