Re: [PATCH 6/9] clockpro-clockpro.patch

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 11:37:34AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 20:40 -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 11:43:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > 
> > > From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
> > 
> > Peter,
> > 
> > I tried your "scan-shared.c" proggy which loops over 140M of a file
> > using mmap (on a 128MB box). The number of loops was configured to "5".
> > 
> > The amount of major/minor pagefaults was exactly the same between
> > vanilla and clockpro, isnt the clockpro algorithm supposed to be
> > superior than LRU in such "sequential scan of MEMSIZE+1" cases?
> yes it should, hmm, have to look at that then.
> What should happen is that nr_cold_target should drop to the bare
> minimum, which effectivly pins all hot pages and only rotates the few
> cold pages.

I screwed up the tests. Here are the real numbers.

Test: scan 140MB file sequentially, 5 times.
Env: 128Mb machine

CLOCK-Pro:	0:49:98elapsed	18%CPU

		1:28.05elapsed	11%CPU

Kicking some large arses!

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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]
  Powered by Linux