[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ac5dec0d-e593-4a82-8c9d-8aa374e8c6ed@default>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 16:31:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
Cc: npiggin@...e.de, akpm@...l.org, jeremy@...p.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, tmem-devel@....oracle.com,
kurt.hackel@...cle.com, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave.mccracken@...cle.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, chris.mason@...cle.com,
sunil.mushran@...cle.com, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] (Take 2): transcendent memory
("tmem") for Linux
Hi Anthony --
Thanks for the comments.
> I have trouble mapping this to a VMM capable of overcommit
> without just coming back to CMM2.
>
> In CMM2 parlance, ephemeral tmem pools is just normal kernel memory
> marked in the volatile state, no?
They are similar in concept, but a volatile-marked kernel page
is still a kernel page, can be changed by a kernel (or user)
store instruction, and counts as part of the memory used
by the VM. An ephemeral tmem page cannot be directly written
by a kernel (or user) store, can only be read via a "get" (which
may or may not succeed), and doesn't count against the memory
used by the VM (even though it likely contains -- for awhile --
data useful to the VM).
> It seems to me that an architecture built around hinting
> would be more
> robust than having to use separate memory pools for this type
> of memory
> (especially since you are requiring a copy to/from the pool).
Depends on what you mean by robust, I suppose. Once you
understand the basics of tmem, it is very simple and this
is borne out in the low invasiveness of the Linux patch.
Simplicity is another form of robustness.
> For instance, you can mark data DMA'd from disk (perhaps by
> read-ahead)
> as volatile without ever bringing it into the CPU cache.
> With tmem, if
> you wanted to use a tmem pool for all of the page cache, you'd likely
> suffer significant overhead due to copying.
The copy may be expensive on an older machine, but on newer
machines copying a page is relatively inexpensive. On a reasonable
multi-VM-kernbench-like benchmark I'll be presenting at Linux
Symposium next week, the overhead is on the order of 0.01%
for a fairly significant savings in IOs.
--
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