public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Cc: Mario Vanoni <vanonim@dial.eunet.ch>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFS problem after 2.4.19-pre3, not solved
Date: 14 May 2002 10:06:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <shswuu7f91i.fsf@charged.uio.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3CDC4962.4B9393D7@dial.eunet.ch> <15582.65383.578660.222454@charged.uio.no> <20020513184050.D22902@dualathlon.random>

>>>>> " " == Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> writes:


     > the thing that makes the difference is the backout-cto patch
     > according those numbers and I doubt it is influencing the page
     > replacement in any way (is kernel-side memory pressure going to
     > increase significantly with cto?).

No. The only possibility I can see is if the extra checks are causing
extra cache invalidations. I don't why that should be the case, but
then again I'm not able to reproduce those numbers...

     > 2.4.19-pre3 vanilla first time after boot 5m15s, then 1m56s
     > 1m57s 1m56s 1m56s 1m57s

     > 2.4.19-pre4 vanilla 5m20s, then 4m00s 4m01s 4m00s 4m01s 4m01a

     > 2.4.19-pre4-nfs-backout-cto, from pr8aa2, 2 Hunks 5m13a, then
     > 1m57s 1m58s 1m57s 1m58s 1m59s

     > nfs-backout-cto is appended. Now if the previous kernel was
     > buggy and it was not invalidating "invalid" cache then cto is
     > right, otherwise it sounds like the cto patch is invalidating
     > more cache than necessary.

Check the patch: it doesn't invalidate the cache when the mtime stays
the same. A tcpdump would show whether this is the case or not.

I would be interested to see if this is something that is related to
nfs-server only. (I.e. whether or not Mario can see the same problem
with knfsd.)


Cheers,
  Trond

      reply	other threads:[~2002-05-14  8:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-05-10 22:27 NFS problem after 2.4.19-pre3, not solved Mario Vanoni
2002-05-10 21:17 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-05-11 21:37   ` Mario Vanoni
2002-05-12 23:48 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-05-13 16:40   ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-05-14  8:06     ` Trond Myklebust [this message]

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=shswuu7f91i.fsf@charged.uio.no \
    --to=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
    --cc=andrea@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vanonim@dial.eunet.ch \
    /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