Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 19:23:50 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: alc@freebsd.org Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, hackers@freebsd.org, Grzegorz Kulewski <grzegorz@kulewski.pl> Subject: Re: mmap performance and memory use Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110071916190.8664@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <CAJUyCcMKZ1E5LoJ0BFZju_OH_jjDeqgvBMf8WZ%2BwDvJRFsbH6Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110061637270.15552@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20111006160159.GQ1511@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <CAJUyCcMKZ1E5LoJ0BFZju_OH_jjDeqgvBMf8WZ%2BwDvJRFsbH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> You are correct about the page table page. However, a superpage mapping consumes a single PV entry, in place of 512 or 1024 PV
> entries. This winds up saving about three physical pages worth of memory for every superpage mapping.
does it actually work?
simple test
before (only idle system with 2GB RAM and most free)
vm.pmap.pde.promotions: 921
vm.pmap.pde.p_failures: 21398
vm.pmap.pde.mappings: 299
vm.pmap.pde.demotions: 596
vm.pmap.shpgperproc: 200
vm.pmap.pv_entry_max: 696561
vm.pmap.pg_ps_enabled: 1
vm.pmap.pat_works: 1
and with that program running (==sleeping)
#include <unistd.h>
int a[1<<24];
main() {
int b;
for(b=0;b<(1<<24);b++) a[b]=b;
sleep(1000);
}
vm.pmap.pdpe.demotions: 0
vm.pmap.pde.promotions: 952
vm.pmap.pde.p_failures: 21398
vm.pmap.pde.mappings: 299
vm.pmap.pde.demotions: 596
vm.pmap.shpgperproc: 200
vm.pmap.pv_entry_max: 696561
vm.pmap.pg_ps_enabled: 1
vm.pmap.pat_works: 1
seems like i don't understand what these sysctl things mean (i did sysctl -d)
or it doesn't really work. with program allocating and using linear 64MB
chunk it should be 31 or 32 more mappings in vm.pmap.pde.mappings
there are zero difference.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1110071916190.8664>