[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070817064727.GA6723@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:47:27 +0800
From: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn>
To: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
John Berthels <jjberthels@...il.com>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] maps: /proc/<pid>/pmaps interface - memory maps in
granularity of pages
Matt,
It's not easy to do direct performance comparisons between pmaps and
pagemap/kpagemap. However some close analyzes are still possible :)
1) code size
pmaps ~200 LOC
pagemap/kpagemap ~300 LOC
2) dataset size
take for example my running firefox on Intel Core 2:
VSZ 400 MB
RSS 64 MB, or 16k pages
pmaps 64 KB, wc shows 2k lines, or so much page ranges
pagemap 800 KB, could be heavily optimized by returning partial data
kpagemap 256 KB
3) runtime overheads
pmaps 2k lines of string processing(encode/decode)
kpagemap 16k seek()/read()s, and context switches (could be
optimized somehow by doing a PFN sort first, but
that's also non-trivial overheads)
So pmaps seems to be a clear winner :)
Thank you,
Fengguang
-
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