Re: missing madvise functionality

[Eric Dumazet]

Rik van Riel a Ãcrit :
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Oh.  I was assuming that we'd want to unmap these pages from 
> > pagetables and
> > mark then super-easily-reclaimable.  So a later touch would incur a minor
> > fault.
> >
> > But you think that we should leave them mapped into pagetables so no such
> > fault occurs.
>
> > Leaving the pages mapped into pagetables means that they are considerably
> > less likely to be reclaimed.
>
> If we move the pages to a place where they are very likely to be
> reclaimed quickly (end of the inactive list, or a separate
> reclaim list) and clear the dirty and referenced lists, we can
> both reclaim the page easily *and* avoid the page fault penalty.

There is one possible speedup :

- If an user app does a madvise(MADV_DONTNEED), we can assume the pages can 
later be bring back without need to zero them. The application doesnt care.

A page fault is not that expensive. But clearing N*PAGE_SIZE bytes is, because 
it potentially evicts a large part of CPU cache.

If I recall well, mysql bench Ulrich mentioned was allocating/freeing large 
areas (100 Kbytes or so) in a loop.

mmap()/brk() must give fresh NULL pages, but maybe madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) can 
relax this requirement (if the pages were reclaimed, then a page fault could 
bring a new page with random content)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/