From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk" <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
avi@redhat.com,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ZERO PAGE again v2
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 09:59:39 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0907070952341.3210@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090707140033.GB2714@wotan.suse.de>
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> I just wouldn't like to re-add significant complexity back to
> the vm without good and concrete examples. OK I agree that
> just saying "rewrite your code" is not so good, but are there
> real significant problems? Is it inside just a particuar linear
> algebra library or something that might be able to be updated?
The thing is, ZERO_PAGE really used to work very well.
It was not only useful for simple "I want lots of memory, and I'm going to
use it pretty sparsely" (which _is_ a very valid thing to do), but it was
useful for TLB benchmarking, and for cache-efficient "I'm going to write
lots of zeroes to files", and for a number of other uses.
You can talk about TLB pressure all you want, but the fact is, quite often
normal cache effects dominate - and ZERO_PAGE is _wonderful_ for sharing
cachelines (which is why it was so useful for TLB performance testing: map
a huge area, and you know that there will be no cache effects, only TLB
effects).
There are actually very few cases where TLB effects are the primary ones -
they tend to happen when you have truly random accesses that have no
locality even on a small case. That's pretty rare. Even things that depend
on sparse arrays etc tend to mainly _access_ the parts it works on (ie you
may have allocated hundreds of megs of memory to simplify your memory
management, but you work on only a small part of it).
So it's not just "people actually use it". It really was a useful feature,
with valid uses. We got rid of it, but if we can re-introduce it cleanly,
we definitely should.
I don't understand why you fight it. If we can do it well (read: without
having fork/exit cause endless amounts of cache ping-pongs due to touching
'struct page *'), there are no downsides that I can see. It's not like
it's a complicated feature.
Linus
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-07 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-07 7:51 [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ZERO PAGE again v2 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 7:52 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/4] introduce pte_zero() KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 7:54 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/4] use ZERO_PAGE for READ fault in regular anonymous mapping KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 7:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/4] get_user_pages READ fault handling special cases KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 16:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-08 0:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-08 1:38 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-08 2:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-07 8:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] add get user pages nozero KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 8:47 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ZERO PAGE again v2 Nick Piggin
2009-07-07 9:05 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-07 9:18 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 9:26 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-07 9:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-07 14:00 ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-07 16:59 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-07-08 6:21 ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-08 16:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-09 7:47 ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-09 17:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-10 2:09 ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-10 3:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-07-10 3:51 ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-08 17:32 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-07-09 1:12 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-10 11:18 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-07-10 13:42 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-07-10 14:12 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-10 15:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-07-10 15:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-10 17:09 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-07-13 6:46 ` Nick Piggin
2009-07-13 7:24 ` Nick Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-07-07 15:50 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.01.0907070952341.3210@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).