Re: Note describing poor dcache utilization under high memory pressure

Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Wed, 30 Jan 2002 12:46:53 -0200 (BRST)


On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On January 30, 2002 10:07 am, Horst von Brand wrote:

> > But most of this will be lost on exec(2).

> > Also, it is my impression that
> > the tree of _running_ processes isn't usually very deep (Say init --> X -->
> > [Random processes] --> [compilations &c], this would make 5 or 6 deep, no
> > more.

> Here's my tree - on a non-very-busy laptop. Why is my X tree so much deeper?
> I suppose if I was running java this would look considerably more interesting.

> |-bash---bash---xinit-+-XFree86
> | `-xfwm-+-xfce---gnome-terminal-+-bash---pstree

It doesn't matter how deep the tree is, on exec() all
previously shared page tables will be blown away.

In this part of the tree, I see exactly 2 processes
which could be sharing page tables (the two bash
processes).

regards,

Rik

-- 
"Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
    -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document

http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

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