[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1ef1abbc-f092-4784-9f2e-1d9ca151e9e0@default>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Cyclonus J <cyclonusj@...il.com>,
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, ngupta@...are.org,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, JBeulich@...ell.com,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: RE: [GIT PULL] mm: frontswap (for 3.2 window)
> From: Avi Kivity [mailto:avi@...hat.com]
> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] mm: frontswap (for 3.2 window)
>
> On 11/02/2011 06:02 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > Hi Avi,
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 05:44:50PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > If you look at cleancache, then it addresses this concern - it extends
> > > pagecache through host memory. When dropping a page from the tail of
> > > the LRU it first goes into tmem, and when reading in a page from disk
> > > you first try to read it from tmem. However in many workloads,
> > > cleancache is actually detrimental. If you have a lot of cache misses,
> > > then every one of them causes a pointless vmexit; considering that
> > > servers today can chew hundreds of megabytes per second, this adds up.
> > > On the other side, if you have a use-once workload, then every page that
> > > falls of the tail of the LRU causes a vmexit and a pointless page copy.
> >
> > I also think it's bad design for Virt usage, but hey, without this
> > they can't even run with cache=writeback/writethrough and they're
> > forced to cache=off, and then they claim specvirt is marketing, so for
> > Xen it's better than nothing I guess.
>
> Surely Xen can use the pagecache, it uses Linux for I/O just like kvm.
>
> > I'm trying right now to evaluate it as a pure zcache host side
> > optimization.
>
> zcache style usage is fine. It's purely internal so no ABI constraints,
> and no hypercalls either. It's still synchronous though so RAMster like
> approaches will not work well.
Still experimental, but only the initial local put must be synchronous.
RAMster uses a separate thread to "remotify" pre-compressed pages.
The "get" still needs to be synchronous, but (if I ever have time to
get back to coding it) I've got some ideas on how to fix that. If
I manage to get that working, perhaps it could be used for Andrea's
write-precompressed-zcache-pages-to-disk.
Dan
--
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