From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262509AbUKWC2l (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:28:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261226AbUKWC0u (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:26:50 -0500 Received: from holomorphy.com ([207.189.100.168]:36767 "EHLO holomorphy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262509AbUKWCZa (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:25:30 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:25:15 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Linus Torvalds , Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton , benh@kernel.crashing.org, hugh@veritas.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: page fault scalability patch V11 [0/7]: overview Message-ID: <20041123022515.GJ2714@holomorphy.com> References: <20041119225701.0279f846.akpm@osdl.org> <419EEE7F.3070509@yahoo.com.au> <1834180000.1100969975@[10.10.2.4]> <20041120190818.GX2714@holomorphy.com> <20041120193325.GZ2714@holomorphy.com> <20041122224333.GI2714@holomorphy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> The specific patches you compared matter a great deal as there are >> implementation blunders (e.g. poor placement of counters relative to >> ->mmap_sem) that can ruin the results. URL's to the specific patches >> would rule out that source of error. On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 02:51:22PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > I mentioned V4 of this patch which was posted to lkml. A simple search > should get you there. The counter's placement was poor in that version of the patch. The results are very suspect and likely invalid. It would have been more helpful if you provided some kind of unique identifier when requests for complete disambiguation are made. For instance, the version tags of your patches are not visible in Subject: lines. There are, of course, other issues, e.g. where the arch sweeps went. This discussion has degenerated into non-cooperation making it beyond my power to help, and I'm in the midst of several rather urgent bughunts, of which there are apparently more to come. -- wli