From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Frank Dekervel <Frank.dekervel@student.kuleuven.ac.Be>,
Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: need help interpreting 'free' output.
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 19:58:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011030195828.X1340@athlon.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011030191612.S1340@athlon.random> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110301017240.12018-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110301017240.12018-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>; from torvalds@transmeta.com on Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 10:28:29AM -0800
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 10:28:29AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> want to lock the page - because locking the page means that you can pause
> for a _long_ time waiting for the page to be written out when there is IO
> pending.
ok I see what you mean, I agree (going to merge those important bits
into my tree! :)
however those locking bits have nothing to do with exclusive_swap_page
and the ealry cow I believe. exclusive_swap_page is faster than
remove_exclusive_swap_page + only_swap_page as said in the earlier email
and don't forget you somehow need the page lock too for
remove_exclusive_swap_page.
The magic word here is "_trylock_" after your wait_on_page if the page
wasn't uptodate, it's not that avoiding the early-cow or your
remove_exclusive_swap_cache will change anything (they only slowdowns).
So in short we only need to replace the lock_page with a TryLockPage
(plus your wait_on_page if page is not uptodate to catch the major
faults) and here we go, faster than pre5.
In previous emails I was thinking at major faults, of course the whole
optimization here is for the _minor_ faults were we don't need to block
and where pre5aa1 blocks and where pre5 vanilla doesn't block! Very good
point.
Andrea
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-30 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-30 11:32 need help interpreting 'free' output Frank Dekervel
2001-10-30 11:46 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-30 14:02 ` Frank Dekervel
2001-10-30 16:07 ` Hugh Dickins
2001-10-30 16:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-30 16:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-30 17:06 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-30 17:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-30 17:39 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-30 17:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-30 18:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-30 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-30 18:58 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2001-10-30 19:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-30 20:05 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-30 20:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-30 18:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-10-30 20:47 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-30 18:11 ` Frank Dekervel
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=20011030195828.X1340@athlon.random \
--to=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=Frank.dekervel@student.kuleuven.ac.Be \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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