[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45091F9A.5020805@vmware.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 02:23:38 -0700
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
To: schwidefsky@...ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
akpm@...l.org, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, frankeh@...son.ibm.com,
rhim@...gateh.edu
Subject: Re: [patch 3/9] Guest page hinting: volatile page cache.
Martin Schwidefsky wrote
> The discard fault happens on access to a volatile that has been
> discarded. An important property of the s390 architecture comes into
> play here: there are two page tables, a guest page table and a host page
> table. What the guest perceives as its "physical" memory is in virtual
> storage for the host. An address resolution has to walk two pages
> tables, if a pte is invalid in either table you get a fault. A guest
> fault if the invalid pte is in the guest table and a host fault if it is
>
Yes, I'm familiar with that trick. Wasn't sure if you had it in
hardware or not.
> in the host table. That gives s390 a simple method to implement
> discarded pages: the hypervisor just unmaps the page from the host table
> and changes the state of the guest page. I can see that you will have a
> much harder time to implement this on i386.
>
Nah, I think we'll do just fine.
Thanks for the info - based on this, I think we can probably use the
volatile page / swap cache changes as well for VMware, also pretty much
unchanged. Sorry to take so long to look at these patches, BTW - I was
on holiday for two weeks.
Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists