Re: prezeroing V6 [2/3]: ScrubD

From: Christoph Lameter <>
Date: 2005-02-08 12:15:02
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 stuff?

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 (also need to do the same for the atomic page fault
ops and the prefaulting patch).

> > > Should we be managing the kernel threads with the kthread() API?
> >
> > What would you like to manage?
> Startup, perhaps binding the threads to their cpus too.

That is all already controllable in the same way as the swapper. Each
memory node is bound to a set of cpus. This may be controlled by the
NUMA node configuration. F.e. for nodes without cpus.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Mon Feb 7 20:21:44 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:35 EST