From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751684AbaCAGLK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 1 Mar 2014 01:11:10 -0500
Received: from mail-ve0-f172.google.com ([209.85.128.172]:38593 "EHLO
	mail-ve0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751285AbaCAGLI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 1 Mar 2014 01:11:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20140228174150.8ff4edca.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <1393625931-2858-1-git-send-email-quning@google.com>
 <CACQD4-5U3P+QiuNKzt5+VdDDi0ocphR+Jh81eHqG6_+KeaHyRw@mail.gmail.com> <20140228174150.8ff4edca.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
From: Ning Qu <quning@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 22:10:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CACQD4-7UUDMeXdR-NaAAXvk-NRYqW7mHJkjDUM=JRvL54b_Xsg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] mm, shmem: map few pages around fault address if they
 are in page cache
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Yes, I am using the iozone -i 0 -i 1. Let me try the most simple test
as you mentioned.
Best wishes,
-- 
Ning Qu


On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:35:16 -0800 Ning Qu <quning@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry about my fault about the experiments, here is the real one.
>>
>> Btw, apparently, there are still some questions about the results and
>> I will sync with Kirill about his test command line.
>>
>> Below is just some simple experiment numbers from this patch, let me know if
>> you would like more:
>>
>> Tested on Xeon machine with 64GiB of RAM, using the current default fault
>> order 4.
>>
>> Sequential access 8GiB file
>>                         Baseline        with-patch
>> 1 thread
>>     minor fault         8,389,052    4,456,530
>>     time, seconds    9.55            8.31
>
> The numbers still seem wrong.  I'd expect to see almost exactly 2M minor
> faults with this test.
>
> Looky:
>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <fcntl.h>
>
> #define G (1024 * 1024 * 1024)
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
>         char *p;
>         int fd;
>         unsigned long idx;
>         int sum = 0;
>
>         fd = open("foo", O_RDONLY);
>         if (fd < 0) {
>                 perror("open");
>                 exit(1);
>         }
>         p = mmap(NULL, 1 * G, PROT_READ, MAP_PRIVATE, fd, 0);
>         if (p == MAP_FAILED) {
>                 perror("mmap");
>                 exit(1);
>         }
>
>         for (idx = 0; idx < 1 * G; idx += 4096)
>                 sum += p[idx];
>         printf("%d\n", sum);
>         exit(0);
> }
>
> z:/home/akpm> /usr/bin/time ./a.out
> 0
> 0.05user 0.33system 0:00.38elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 4195856maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (0major+262264minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>
> z:/home/akpm> dc
> 16o
> 262264 4 * p
> 1001E0
>
> That's close!