Ulrich Drepper wrote:
Nick Piggin wrote:
Cool. According to my thinking, madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) even in today's
kernels using down_write(mmap_sem) for MADV_DONTNEED is better than
mmap/mprotect, which have more fundamental locking requirements, more
overhead and no benefits (except debugging, I suppose).
It's a tiny bit faster, see
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/dontneed.png
I just ran it once so the graph is not smooth. This is on a UP dual
core machine. Maybe tomorrow I'll turn on the big 4p machine.
Hmm, I saw an improvement, but that was just on a raw syscall test
with a single page chunk. Real-world use I guess will get progressively
less dramatic as other overheads start being introduced.
Multi-thread performance probably won't get a whole lot better (it does
eliminate 1 down_write(mmap_sem), but one remains) until you use my
madvise patch.
I would have to see dramatically different results on the big machine to
make me change the libc code. The reason is that there is a big drawback.
So far, when we allocate a new arena, we allocate address space with
PROT_NONE and only when we need memory the protection is changed to
PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE. This is the advantage of catching wild pointer
accesses.
Sure, yes. And I guess you'd always want to keep that options around as
a debugging aid.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
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/