Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2007 23:20:12 +0530
> Balbir Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>A meaningful container size does not hamper performance. I am in the process
>>of getting more results (with varying container sizes). Please let me know
>>what you think of the results? Would you like to see different benchmarks/
>>tests/configuration results?
>>
>>Any feedback, suggestions to move this work forward towards identifying
>>and correcting bottlenecks or to help improve it is highly appreciated.
>
>
> <wakes up>
>
> Memory reclaim tends not to consume much CPU. Because in steady state it
> tends to be the case that the memory reclaim rate (and hopefully the
> scanning rate) is equal to the disk IO rate.
> Often the most successful way to identify performance problems in there is
> by careful code inspection followed by development of exploits.
>
> Is this RSS controller built on Paul's stuff, or is it standalone?
it is based on Paul's patches.
> Where do we stand on all of this now anyway? I was thinking of getting Paul's
> changes into -mm soon, see what sort of calamities that brings about.
I think we can merge Paul's patches with *interfaces* and then switch to
developing/reviewing/commiting resource subsytems.
RSS control had good feedback so far from a number of people
and is a first candidate imho.
Thanks,
Kirill
-
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]
