On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:14:19 -0700 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:02:56 +1000 "Matthew Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > We all know swap prefetch has been tested out the wazoo since Moses was a > > little boy, is compile-time and runtime selectable, and gives an important > > and quantifiable performance increase to desktop systems. > > Always interested. Please provide us more details on your usage and > testing of that code. Amount of memory, workload, observed results, > etc? > I only have 512 MB of memory on my Athlon64 desktop box, and I switch between -mm and mainline kernels regularly. I have noticed that -mm is always much more responsive, especially first thing in the morning. I believe this has been due to the new schedulers in -mm (because I notice an improvement in mainline now that CFS has been merged), as well as swap prefetch. I haven't tested swap prefetch alone to know for sure, but it seems pretty likely. My workload is compiling kernels, with sylpheed, pidgin and firefox[1] open, and sometimes MonoDevelop if I want to slow my system to a crawl. I will be getting another 512 MB of RAM at Christmas time, but from the other reports, it seems that swap prefetch will still be useful. [1] Is there a graphical browser for linux that doesn't suck huge amounts of RAM? -- Kevin Winchester
pgptNkcWRn6hg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
