[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080402221228.GX19189@duo.random>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 00:12:28 +0200
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>, Izik Eidus <izike@...ranet.com>,
kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
Kanoj Sarcar <kanojsarcar@...oo.com>, steiner@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
daniel.blueman@...drics.com
Subject: Re: [patch 5/9] Convert anon_vma lock to rw_sem and refcount
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 02:56:25PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> I am a bit surprised that brk performance is that important. There may be
I think it's not brk but fork that is being slowed down, did you
oprofile? AIM forks a lot... The write side fast path generating the
overscheduling I guess is when the new vmas are created for the child
and queued in the parent anon-vma in O(1), so immediate, even
preempt-rt would be ok with it spinning and not scheduling, it's just
a list_add (much faster than schedule() indeed). Every time there's a
collision when multiple child forks simultaneously and they all try to
queue in the same anon-vma, things will slowdown.
--
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