On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Just tinkering around with this and got something working, so I'll see
> if anyone else wants to try it.
>
> Not proposing for inclusion, but I'd be interested in comments or results.
We would be very interested in such a feature. We have another hack that
shows up to 40% performance improvements.
> At the moment the code is a bit ugly, but it won't take much to make it a
> completely standalone ~400 line module with just a handful of hooks into
> the core mm. So if anyone really wants it, it could be quite realistic to
> get into an includable form.
Would be great but I am a bit skeptical regarding the locking and the
additonal overhead moving back and forth between replications and non
replicated page state.
> At some point I did take a look at Dave Hansen's page replication patch for
> ideas, but didn't get far because he was doing a per-inode scheme and I was
> doing per-page. No judgments on which approach is better, but I feel this
> per-page patch is quite neat.
Definitely looks better.
> - Would be nice to transfer master on reclaim. This should be quite easy,
> must transfer relevant flags, and only if !PagePrivate (which reclaim
> takes care of).
Transfer master? Meaning you need to remove the replicated pages? Removing
of replicated pages should transfer reference bit?
> - Should go nicely with lockless pagecache, but haven't merged them yet.
When is that going to happen? Soon I hope?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
