Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Note describing poor dcache utilization under high memory pressure | Date | Wed, 30 Jan 2002 10:07:44 +0100 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net> said: > On January 29, 2002 12:54 pm, Helge Hafting wrote: > > Momchil Velikov wrote:
[...]
> > > Umm, all the ptes af the parent ought to be made COW, no ?
> > Sure. But quite a few of them may be COW already, if the parent > > itself is a result of some earlier fork.
> Right, or if the parent has already forked at least one child.
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. Should take a pstree(1) listing on a busy machine and work out some statistics... here (a personal worstation) the tree is very fat at the first level below init(8), and just 5 deep when running pstree(1)). Sure, all processes will all end up sharing glibc, and the graphical stuff will share the X &c libraries, so this would end up being a win this way. -- Horst von Brand http://counter.li.org # 22616 - 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/
| |