Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262240AbUCGRX1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:23:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262257AbUCGRX1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:23:27 -0500 Received: from ppp-217-133-42-200.cust-adsl.tiscali.it ([217.133.42.200]:36100 "EHLO dualathlon.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262240AbUCGRX0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:23:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 18:24:07 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Peter Zaitsev , Andrew Morton , riel@redhat.com, mbligh@aracnet.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.23aa2 (bugfixes and important VM improvements for the high end) Message-ID: <20040307172407.GA4922@dualathlon.random> References: <1078370073.3403.759.camel@abyss.local> <20040303193343.52226603.akpm@osdl.org> <1078371876.3403.810.camel@abyss.local> <20040305103308.GA5092@elte.hu> <20040305141504.GY4922@dualathlon.random> <20040305143210.GA11897@elte.hu> <20040305145837.GZ4922@dualathlon.random> <20040305152622.GA14375@elte.hu> <20040305155317.GC4922@dualathlon.random> <20040307084120.GB17629@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040307084120.GB17629@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 13D9 8355 295F 4823 7C49 C012 DFA1 686E 68B9 CB43 X-PGP-Key: 1024R/CB4660B9 CC A0 71 81 F4 A0 63 AC C0 4B 81 1D 8C 15 C8 E5 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1132 Lines: 25 On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 09:41:20AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > [...] but I'm quite confortable to say that up to 16G (included) 4:4 > > is worthless unless you've to deal with the rmap waste IMHO. [...] > > i've seen workloads on 8G RAM systems that easily filled up the ~800 MB > lowmem zone. (it had to do with many files and having them as a big was that a kernel with rmap or w/o rmap? > but i'm quite strongly convinced that 'getting rid' of the 'pte chain > overhead' in favor of questionable lowmem space gains for a dying > (high-end server) platform is very shortsighted. [getting rid of them > for purposes of the 64-bit platforms could be OK, but the argumentation > isnt that strong there i think.] disagree, the reason I'm doing it is for the 64bit platforms, I can't care less about x86. the vm is dogslow with rmap. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/