Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:20:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:20:38 -0400 Received: from [195.223.140.120] ([195.223.140.120]:22850 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:20:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 02:20:46 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Aviv Shavit Cc: Ken Brownfield , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: vm-33, strongly recommended [Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable] Message-ID: <20020412022046.B31905@dualathlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20020411183443.A21005@asooo.flowerfire.com> <20020411235015.78405.qmail@web13203.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 04:50:15PM -0700, Aviv Shavit wrote: > This goes back to my previous post - > Applying only the vm patches didn't get me far. > > I'm still trying to pin point what it is thats helping > me out in -aa For the level of cache during your workload (you mentioned that variable in the previous email) what matters mostly is the vm-33 patch. Do you get significantly different levels of cache with only the vm-33 patch compared to the whole latest -aa? (there are other variables too that could influence the level of cache, the readahead boost for example, but they're much less likely to influence the cache levels than the vm-33 patch) It maybe the benefit you see is not only in the VM part, but it could came also the dozen of other fixes and improvements. For example starting from the lowlatency fixes from Andrew (note: _fixes_) to highio (from Jens) if you've highmem, to the dyn-sched (from Davide) if you've tons of sleeping tasks or interactive processes etc... The reason I maintain the main patches like the vm one also against mainline, is exactly to address Ken's concern about being able to apply just one patch if he's not confortable with the whole patchkit, and secondly to be able to test it separately without the pollution. I feel the vm patch is one of the most important and that's why I mentioned it in particular, but the lowlatency fixes and lots of other stuff is important too. But I've also the feeling the other stuff [modulo the major things like pte-highmem and highio that at least affects only the x86 high-end and not that much desktops or little server] is much much easier to get integrated and that's why I worry much less about it. Thanks for all the feedback and testing! Andrea - 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/