On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Vlad Bolkhovitine wrote:
> >
> > > You can see, mmap() read performance dropped significantly as
> > > well as read() one raised. Plus, "interactivity" of 2.4.0 system
> > > was much worse during mmap'ed test, than using read()
> > > (everything was quite smooth here). 2.4.0-test7 was badly
> > > interactive in both cases.
> >
> > Could have to do with page_launder() ... I'm working on
> > streaming mmap() performance here and have been working
> > on this for a week now (amongst other things).
>
> Also remember that drop_behind() is not working for mmap(), yet...
filemap_sync(..., MS_INVALIDATE) needs a 2-line change to have
drop-behind. I have this running (more or less) on my laptop here.
regards,
Rik
--
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
