[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <4A3F95F1.4020507@lfbs.rwth-aachen.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:32:17 +0200
From: Stefan Lankes <lankes@...s.rwth-aachen.de>
To: Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
'Andi Kleen' <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-numa@...r.kernel.org,
Boris Bierbaum <boris@...s.RWTH-Aachen.DE>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4]: affinity-on-next-touch
Brice Goglin wrote:
> Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 09:45 +0200, Stefan Lankes wrote:
>>
>>
>> Today I rebased the migrate on fault patches to 2.6.30-mmotm-090612...
>> [along with my shared policy series atop which they sit in my tree].
>> Patches reside in:
>>
>> http://free.linux.hp.com/~lts/Patches/PageMigration/2.6.30-mmotm-090612-1220/
>>
>>
>
> I gave this patchset a try and indeed it seems to work fine, thanks a
> lot. But the migration performance isn't very good. I am seeing about
> 540MB/s when doing mbind+touch_all_pages on large buffers on a
> quad-barcelona machines. move_pages gets 640MB/s there. And my own
> next-touch implementation were near 800MB/s in the past.
I used a modified stream benchmark to evaluate the performance of Lee's
and my version of the next-touch implementation. In this low-level
benchmark is Lee's patch better than my patch. I think that Brice and I
use the same technique to realize affinity-on-next-touch. Do you use
another kernel version to evaluate the performance?
Stefan
--
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