[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BD9D7A5.1070003@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:01:57 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, jeremy@...p.org, hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk,
ngupta@...are.org, JBeulich@...ell.com, chris.mason@...cle.com,
kurt.hackel@...cle.com, dave.mccracken@...cle.com, npiggin@...e.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview
On 04/29/2010 09:59 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
> I'm convinced it's useful. The API is so close to a block device
> (read/write with key/value vs read/write with sector/value) that we
> should make the effort not to introduce a new API.
>
Plus of course the asynchronity and batching of the block layer. Even
if you don't use a dma engine, you improve performance by exiting one
per several dozen pages instead of for every page, perhaps enough to
allow the hypervisor to justify copying the memory with non-temporal moves.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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