On 07/02/2013 10:37 AM, Zheng Liu wrote:
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 09:16:46AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 06/28/2013 07:20 PM, Zheng Liu wrote:
IOW, a process needing to do a bunch of MAP_POPULATEs isn't
parallelizable, but one using this mechanism would be.
I look at the code, and it seems that we will handle MAP_POPULATE flag
after we release mmap_sem locking in vm_mmap_pgoff():
down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
ret = do_mmap_pgoff(file, addr, len, prot, flag, pgoff,
&populate);
up_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
if (populate)
mm_populate(ret, populate);
Am I missing something?
I went and did my same test using mmap(MAP_POPULATE)/munmap() pair
versus using MADV_POPULATE in 160 threads in parallel.
MADV_POPULATE was about 10x faster in the threaded configuration.
With MADV_POPULATE, the biggest cost is shipping the mmap_sem cacheline
around so that we can write the reader count update in to it. With
mmap(), there is a lot of _contention_ on that lock which is much, much
more expensive than simply bouncing a cacheline around.
Thanks for your explanation.
FWIW, it would be great if we can let MAP_POPULATE flag support shared
mappings because in our product system there has a lot of applications
that uses mmap(2) and then pre-faults this mapping. Currently these
applications need to pre-fault the mapping manually.
How do you pre-fault the mapping manually in your product system? By
walking through the file touching each page?
Regards,
- Zheng
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
