On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 12:51:05 -0800 (PST)
Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > We also need to try to identify workloads whcih might experience a
> > regression and test them too. It isn't very hard.
>
> I'd be glad if you could provide som
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> We also need to try to identify workloads whcih might experience a
> regression and test them too. It isn't very hard.
I'd be glad if you could provide some instructions on how exactly to do
that. I have run lmbench, aim9, aim7, unixbench, ubench for a
Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > No its a page fault benchmark. Dave Miller has done some kernel compiles
> > > and I have some benchmarks here that I never posted because they do not
> > > show any material change as far as I can se
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > No its a page fault benchmark. Dave Miller has done some kernel compiles
> > and I have some benchmarks here that I never posted because they do not
> > show any material change as far as I can see. I will be posting that soon
> > when this is complete
Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > Look at the early posts. I plan to put that up on the web. I have some
> > > stats attached to the end of this message from an earlier post.
> >
> > But that's a patch-specific microbenchmark, isn't i
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Look at the early posts. I plan to put that up on the web. I have some
> > stats attached to the end of this message from an earlier post.
>
> But that's a patch-specific microbenchmark, isn't it? Has this work been
> benchmarked against real-world stu
Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What were the benchmarking results for this work? I think you had some,
> > but this is pretty vital info, so it should be retained in the changelogs.
>
> Look at the early posts. I plan to put that up on the web. I have some
> stats attached to
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Adds management of ZEROED and NOT_ZEROED pages and a background daemon
> > called scrubd.
>
> What were the benchmarking results for this work? I think you had some,
> but this is pretty vital info, so
Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Adds management of ZEROED and NOT_ZEROED pages and a background daemon
> called scrubd.
What were the benchmarking results for this work? I think you had some,
but this is pretty vital info, so it should be retained in the changelogs.
Having one k
Adds management of ZEROED and NOT_ZEROED pages and a background daemon
called scrubd. If a page is coalesced of the order specified in /proc
/sys/scrub_start or higher then the scrub daemon will
start zeroing until all pages of order /proc/sys/vm/scrub_stop and
higher are zeroed and then go back to
10 matches
Mail list logo
