| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 10:56:32 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Ian Stirling <tandra@...ve.plus.com>
Cc: yunfeng zhang <zyf.zeroos@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Improvement on memory subsystem
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 10:18:44 BST, Ian Stirling said:
> To paraphrase shakespear - all the world is not a P4 - and all the swap
> devices are not hard disks.
Been there, done that. I used to admin a net of Sun 3/50s where /dev/swap
was a symlink to a file on an NFS server, because the "shoebox" local hard
drives for those were so slow that throwing it across the ethernet to a
3/280 with Fujitsu Super-Eagles was faster...
> For example - I've got a 486/33 laptop with 12M RAM that I sometimes use
> , with swapping to a 128M PCMCIA RAM card that I got from somewhere.
If we go to the effort of writing code that tries to be smart about grouping
swap reads/writes by cost, it's easy enough to flag any sort of ram-disk device
as a 'zero seek time' device. Remember that I suggested making it dependent
on "how long until the next pass of the elevator" - for a ramdisk that basically
is zero, so the algorithm easily degenerates into "just queue the requests in
expected order you'll need the results".
> 20K instructions wasted on a device with no seek time is just annoying.
On the other hand, how long does it take to move a 4K page across the
PCMCIA interface? If you're seeing deep queues on it, you may *still*
want to optimize the order of requests...
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists