From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261841AbUCGMKZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:10:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261852AbUCGMKZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:10:25 -0500 Received: from zero.aec.at ([193.170.194.10]:39685 "EHLO zero.aec.at") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261841AbUCGMKY (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:10:24 -0500 To: Ingo Molnar cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrea@suse.de Subject: Re: 2.4.23aa2 (bugfixes and important VM improvements for the high end) References: <1uofN-4Rh-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <1vRz3-5p2-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <1vRSn-5Fc-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <1vS26-5On-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <1wkUr-3QW-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <1wolx-7ET-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <1woEJ-7Yx-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <1wp8c-7x-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <1wprd-qI-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <1wpUz-Tw-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <1x293-2nT-7@gated-at.bofh.it> From: Andi Kleen Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 22:25:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1x293-2nT-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Sun, 07 Mar 2004 09:50:09 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar writes: > but i'm quite strongly convinced that 'getting rid' of the 'pte chain > overhead' in favor of questionable lowmem space gains for a dying > (high-end server) platform is very shortsighted. [getting rid of them > for purposes of the 64-bit platforms could be OK, but the argumentation > isnt that strong there i think.] pte chain locking seems to be still quite far up in profile logs of 2.6 on x86-64 for common workloads. It's nonexistent in mainline 2.4. I would consider this a strong reason to do something about that. -Andi