On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 01:41:08PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > The advantages of this approach over Andreas is basically that the 4k
> > filesystems still can be used as is. 4k is useful for binaries and for
>
> If you mean that with my approach you can't use a 4k filesystem as is,
> that's not correct. I even run the (admittedly premature but
> promising) benchmarks on my patch on a 4k blocksized
> filesystem... Guess what, you can even still mount a 1k fs on a 2.6
> kernel.
Right you can use a 4k filesystem. The 4k blocks are buffers in a larger
page then.
> The main advantage I can see in your patch is that distributions won't
> need to ship a 64k PAGE_SIZE kernel rpm (but your single rpm will be
> slower).
I would think that your approach would be slower since you always have to
populate 1 << N ptes when mmapping a file? Plus there is a lot of wastage
of memory because even a file with one character needs an order N page? So
there are less pages available for the same workload.
Then you are breaking mmap assumptions of applications becaused the order
N kernel will no longer be able to map 4k pages. You likely need a new
binary format that has pages correctly aligned. I know that we would need
one on IA64 if we go beyond the established page sizes.
-
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]
