[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080117121231.11D4.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:23:16 +0900
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Paulo Marques <pmarques@...popie.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mmaped copy too slow?
Hi
> > One thing you could also try is to pass MAP_POPULATE to mmap so that the
> > page tables are filled in at the time of the mmap, avoiding a lot of
> > page faults later.
> >
>
> OK, I will test your idea and report about tomorrow.
> but I don't think page fault is major performance impact.
I got more interesting result :)
MAP_POPULATE is harmful result at large copy.
1G copy
elapse(sec)
--------------------------------------------
mmap 71.54
mmap + madvice 69.63
mmap + populate 100.87
mmap + populate + madvice 101.16
more detail:
time command output of mmap copy
0.50user 3.59system 1:11.54elapsed 5%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
2101192inputs+2097160outputs (32776major+491573minor)pagefaults 0swaps
time command output of mmap+populate copy
0.53user 5.13system 1:40.87elapsed 5%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
4200808inputs+2097160outputs (49164major+737340minor)pagefaults 0swaps
input blocks increase about x2.
in fact, mmap(MAP_POPULATE) read disk to memory and drop it just after,
thus read again.
of cource, when copy file size is enough small, MAP_POPULATE is effective.
100M copy
elapse(sec)
--------------------------------------------
mmap 7.38
mmap + madvice 7.29
mmap + populate 7.13
mmap + populate + madvice 6.65
- kosaki
--
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