To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin)
Subject: Re: Kernel SCM saga..
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 05:14:28 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Mostly alphabetical, except Q, which We do not fancy
Message-ID: <d353vk$72m$1@terminus.zytor.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504060800280.2215@ppc970.osdl.org> <20050408041341.GA8720@taniwha.stupidest.org> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504072127250.28951@ppc970.osdl.org> <20050408050458.GB8720@taniwha.stupidest.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 05:14:28 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 991
Lines: 27

Followup to:  <20050408050458.GB8720@taniwha.stupidest.org>
By author:    Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 09:42:04PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> > Yes. The silly thing is, at least in my local tests it doesn't
> > actually seem to be _doing_ anything while it's slow (there are no
> > system calls except for a few memory allocations and
> > de-allocations). It seems to have some exponential function on the
> > number of pathnames involved etc.
> 
> I see lots of brk calls changing the heap size, up, down, up, down,
> over and over.
> 
> This smells a bit like c++ new/delete behavior to me.
> 

Hmmm... can glibc be clued in to do some hysteresis on the memory
allocation?

	-hpa
-
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/