From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Oct 23 06:13:56 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3D516A4B3
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 23 Oct 2003 06:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.stack.nl (vaak.stack.nl [131.155.140.140])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C69343FE0
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 23 Oct 2003 06:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from marcolz@stack.nl)
Received: by mailhost.stack.nl (Postfix, from userid 65534)
	id 346571F006; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:13:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from turtle.stack.nl (turtle.stack.nl
	[2001:610:1108:5010:2e0:81ff:fe22:51d8])
	by mailhost.stack.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 947671F001; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:13:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by turtle.stack.nl (Postfix, from userid 333)
	id 782D21CC71; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:13:53 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:13:53 +0200
From: Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl>
To: Q <q_dolan@yahoo.com.au>
Message-ID: <20031023131353.GA3111@stack.nl>
References: <20031022082953.GA69506@rot13.obsecurity.org>
	<1066816287.25609.34.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	<20031022095754.GA70026@rot13.obsecurity.org>
	<1066820436.25609.93.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	<20031022144043.GI55642@dan.emsphone.com>
	<20031022155058.GE3640@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
	<20031022204200.GC14012@splashground.de>
	<1066865808.42673.28.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	<20031023112353.GD14012@splashground.de>
	<1066910120.58538.15.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1066910120.58538.15.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD turtle.stack.nl 5.1-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.1-CURRENT
X-URL: http://www.stack.nl/~marcolz/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on 
	vaak.stack.nl
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Some mmap observations compared to Linux 2.6/OpenBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:13:56 -0000

On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 09:55:21PM +1000, Q wrote:
> I beg to differ. It might show linear growth, but the OpenBSD graph is
> definitely not O(n).

Hmm, it looks like that when it hits the next threshold, it's O(n),
but O(1) otherwise. But contrary to the blurry Linux 2.4 fork() graph,
the thresholds seem set at fixed numbers of pages.

Zlo