On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:45:47 +0900 KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:While being able to deal with used-once mappings in page reclaim could be a good idea, this would require us to be able to determine the difference between a page that was accessed once since it was faulted in and a page that got accessed several times. That kind of infrastructure could end up adding more overhead than an immediate reclaim of these streaming mmap pages would save. Given that page faults have overhead too, it does not surprise me that read+write is faster than mmap+memcpy. In threaded applications, page fault overhead will be worse still, since the TLBs need to be synchronized between CPUs (at least at reclaim time). Maybe we should just advise people to use read+write, since it is faster than mmap+memcpy? -- All rights reversed. --
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 004/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingPatches |
| Artem Bityutskiy | [PATCH 18/44 take 2] [UBI] build unit implementation |
| James Morris | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
git: | |
| Paul Jackson | [PATCH] cpuset sched_load_balance kmalloc fix |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
