On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 12:23 pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > but, but. If prefetching is prefetching stuff which that game will
> > > soon use then it'll be an aggregate improvement. If prefetch is
> > > prefetching stuff which that game _won't_ use then prefetch is busted.
> > > Using yield() to artificially cripple kprefetchd is a rather sad
> > > workaround isn't it?
> >
> > It's not the stuff that it prefetches that's the problem; it's the disk
> > access.
>
> But the prefetch code tries to avoid prefetching when the disk is otherwise
> busy (or it should - we discussed that a bit a while ago).
Anything that does disk access delays prefetch fine. Things that only do heavy
cpu do not delay prefetch. Anything reading from disk will be noticeable
during 3d gaming.
> Sorry, I'm not trying to be awkward here - I think that nobbling prefetch
> when there's a lot of CPU activity is just the wrong thing to do and it'll
> harm other workloads.
I can't distinguish between when cpu activity is important (game) and when it
is not (compile), and assuming worst case scenario and not doing any swap
prefetching is my intent. I could add cpu accounting to prefetch_suitable()
instead, but that gets rather messy and yielding achieves the same endpoint.
Cheers,
Con
-
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]
