Re: [PATCH][2.6.20-rc1-mm1] sparsemem vmem_map optimzed pfn_valid() [0/2]

2006-12-20 Thread KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:06:28 -0500 "Bob Picco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry I was looking for AIM VII and/or reaim which are multiuser loads. > The results (2.6.20-rc1-mm1) for EXTREME, SPARSEMEM+VMEMMAP and > SPARSEMEM+VMEMMAP+your+patch are below. Note SPARSEMEM+VMEMMAP AIM VII > wasn't be

Re: [PATCH][2.6.20-rc1-mm1] sparsemem vmem_map optimzed pfn_valid() [0/2]

2006-12-20 Thread Bob Picco
Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA wrote:[Sat Dec 16 2006, 03:31:36AM EST] > This patch implements pfn_valid() micro optimization. > > This uses ia64_pfn_valid() idea to check mem_map is valid or not instead of > sparsemem's logic. > > By this, we'll not access mem_section[] in usual ops. > > I attaches

Re: [PATCH][2.6.20-rc1-mm1] sparsemem vmem_map optimzed pfn_valid() [0/2]

2006-12-16 Thread KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 10:38:53 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > By this, we'll not access mem_section[] in usual ops. > > Why do we need mem_section? We have a page table that fulfills the same > role. > Basically, we

Re: [PATCH][2.6.20-rc1-mm1] sparsemem vmem_map optimzed pfn_valid() [0/2]

2006-12-16 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > By this, we'll not access mem_section[] in usual ops. Why do we need mem_section? We have a page table that fulfills the same role. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECT