> the thing that makes the difference is the backout-cto patch
> according those numbers and I doubt it is influencing the page
> replacement in any way (is kernel-side memory pressure going to
> increase significantly with cto?).
No. The only possibility I can see is if the extra checks are causing
extra cache invalidations. I don't why that should be the case, but
then again I'm not able to reproduce those numbers...
> 2.4.19-pre3 vanilla first time after boot 5m15s, then 1m56s
> 1m57s 1m56s 1m56s 1m57s
> 2.4.19-pre4 vanilla 5m20s, then 4m00s 4m01s 4m00s 4m01s 4m01a
> 2.4.19-pre4-nfs-backout-cto, from pr8aa2, 2 Hunks 5m13a, then
> 1m57s 1m58s 1m57s 1m58s 1m59s
> nfs-backout-cto is appended. Now if the previous kernel was
> buggy and it was not invalidating "invalid" cache then cto is
> right, otherwise it sounds like the cto patch is invalidating
> more cache than necessary.
Check the patch: it doesn't invalidate the cache when the mtime stays
the same. A tcpdump would show whether this is the case or not.
I would be interested to see if this is something that is related to
nfs-server only. (I.e. whether or not Mario can see the same problem
with knfsd.)
Cheers,
Trond
-
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/