| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200708291712.35967.juergen127@kreuzholzen.de> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:12:35 +0200 From: Juergen Beisert <juergen127@...uzholzen.de> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: Daniel Drake <ddrake@...ntes3d.com>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: speeding up swapoff On Wednesday 29 August 2007 16:44, Daniel Drake wrote: > On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 07:30 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > My experiments show that when there is not much free physical memory, > > > swapoff moves pages out of swap at a rate of approximately 5mb/sec. > > > > sounds like about disk speed (at random-seek IO pattern) > > We are only using 'standard' seagate SATA disks, but I would have > thought much more performance (40+ mb/sec) would be reachable. > > > before you go there... is this a "real life" problem? Or just a > > mostly-artificial corner case? (the answer to that obviously is > > relevant for the 'should we really care' question) > > It's more-or-less a real life problem. We have an interactive > application which, when triggered by the user, performs rendering tasks > which must operate in real-time. In attempt to secure performance, we > want to ensure everything is memory resident and that nothing might be > swapped out during the process. So, we run swapoff at that time. Did you play with mlock()? Juergen - 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