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  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:	Sun, 2 May 2010 14:05:59 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Dan Magenheimer <>
To:	Pavel Machek <>
Cc:	Avi Kivity <>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <>,
	Dave Hansen <>,,,,,,,,,,,
Subject: RE: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview

> From: Pavel Machek []
> > > So what needs to be said here is 'frontswap is XX times faster than
> > > swap_ops based solution on workload YY'.
> >
> > Are you asking me to demonstrate that swap-to-hypervisor-RAM is
> > faster than swap-to-disk?
> I would like comparison of swap-to-frontswap vs. swap-to-RAMdisk.
> 									Pavel

Well, it's not really apples-to-apples because swap-to-RAMdisk
is copying to a chunk of RAM with a known permanently-fixed size
so it SHOULD be faster than swap-to-hypervisor, and should
*definitely* be faster than swap-to-in-kernel-compressed-RAM
but I suppose it is still an interesting comparison.  I'll
see what I can do, but it will probably be a couple days to
figure out how to measure it (e.g. without accidentally measuring
any swap-to-disk).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists