linux-kernel - RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] (Take 2): transcendent memory ("tmem") for Linux

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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/