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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200707272243.02336.a1426z@gawab.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:43:02 +0300
From:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: swap-prefetch:  A smart way to make good use of idle resources (was: updatedb)

People wrote:
> >> I believe the users who say their apps really do get paged back in
> >> though, so suspect that's not the case.
> >
> > Stopping the bush-circumference beating, I do not. -ck (and gentoo) have
> > this massive Calimero thing going among their users where people are
> > much less interested in technology than in how the nasty big kernel
> > meanies are keeping them down (*).
>
> I think the problem is elsewhere. Users don't say: "My apps get paged
> back in." They say: "My system is more responsive". They really don't
> care *why* the reaction to a mouse click that takes three seconds with
> a mainline kernel is instantaneous with -ck. Nasty big kernel meanies,
> OTOH, want to understand *why* a patch helps in order to decide whether
> it is really a good idea to merge it. So you've got a bunch of patches
> (aka -ck) which visibly improve the overall responsiveness of a desktop
> system, but apparently no one can conclusively explain why or how they
> achieve that, and therefore they cannot be merged into mainline.
>
> I don't have a solution to that dilemma either.

IMHO, what everybody agrees on, is that swap-prefetch has a positive effect 
in some cases, and nobody can prove an adverse effect (excluding power 
consumption).  The reason for this positive effect is also crystal clear:  
It prefetches from swap on idle into free memory, ie: it doesn't force 
anybody out, and they are the first to be dropped without further swap-out, 
which sounds really smart.

Conclusion:  Either prove swap-prefetch is broken, or get this merged quick.


Thanks!

--
Al

-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ