[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <462C37B9.5090600@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:36:09 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
CC: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, shak <dshaks@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 07:52:44PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
>>It turns out that Nick's patch does not improve peak
>>performance much, but it does prevent the decline when
>>running with 16 threads on my quad core CPU!
>>
>>We _definately_ want both patches, there's a huge benefit
>>in having them both.
>>
>>Here are the transactions/seconds for each combination:
>>
>> vanilla new glibc madv_free kernel madv_free + mmap_sem
>>threads
>>
>>1 610 609 596 545
>>2 1032 1136 1196 1200
>>4 1070 1128 2014 2024
>>8 1000 1088 1665 2087
>>16 779 1073 1310 1999
>
>
> FYI, I have uploaded a testing glibc that uses MADV_FREE and falls back
> to MADV_DONTUSE if MADV_FREE is not available, to
> http://people.redhat.com/jakub/glibc/2.5.90-21.1/
Hmm, I wonder how glibc malloc stacks up to tcmalloc on this test
(after the mmap_sem patch as well).
I'll try running that as well!
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists