Re: Linux 2.4.18pre3-ac1

[ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)]

Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br> writes:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Adam Kropelin wrote:
> 
> > From: "Alan Cox" <alan@redhat.com>
> >
> > > People keep bugging me about the -ac tree stuff so this is whats in my
> > > current internal diff with the ll patch and the ide changes excluded.
> 
> > For the sake of completeness I ran my large inbound FTP transfer test
> > (details in the "Writeout in recent kernels..." thread) on this
> > release. Performance and observed writeout behavior was essentially
> > the same as for 2.4.17, both stock and with -rmap11a. Transfer time
> > was 6:56 and writeout was uneven. 2.4.13-ac7 is still the winner by a
> > significant margin.
> 
> I'm looking into this bug, I just finished the first large
> dbench test set on 2.4.17-rmap11b with 512 MB RAM, tomorrow
> I'll run them with 128 and 32 MB of RAM.
> 
> Luckily you have already shown the other recent kernels to
> have the same performance, so I only have to do half a day
> of testing. I'll try to track down this bug and get it fixed.

Rik while you are looking at your reverse mapping code, I would like
to call to your attention the at least trippling of times for fork.  I
wouldn't be surprised if the reason your rmap vm handles things like
gcc -j better than the stock kernel is simply the reduced number of
processes, due to slower forking.  

Just my 2 cents so we don't forget the caveats of the reverse map
approach.

Eric