Re: [RFC/T/D][PATCH 2/2] Linux/Guest cooperative unmapped page cache control

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Avi Kivity
Date: Monday, June 14, 2010 - 8:44 am

On 06/14/2010 06:33 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:

Yup.  KSM needs to be backed up by ballooning, swap, and live migration.


Isn't the knob in this proposal the balloon?  AFAICT, the idea here is 
to change how the guest reacts to being ballooned, but the trigger 
itself would not change.

My issue is that changing the type of object being preferentially 
reclaimed just changes the type of workload that would prematurely 
suffer from reclaim.  In this case, workloads that use a lot of unmapped 
pagecache would suffer.

btw, aren't /proc/sys/vm/swapiness and vfs_cache_pressure similar knobs?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC/T/D][PATCH 0/2] KVM page cache optimization (v2), Balbir Singh, (Tue Jun 8, 8:51 am)
Re: [RFC/T/D][PATCH 2/2] Linux/Guest cooperative unmapped ..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Thu Jun 10, 6:54 pm)
Re: [RFC/T/D][PATCH 2/2] Linux/Guest cooperative unmapped ..., KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Thu Jun 10, 10:08 pm)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Linux/Guest unmapped page cache control, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Sun Jun 13, 5:28 pm)
Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Linux/Guest unmapped page cache control, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Mon Jun 14, 12:49 am)
Re: [RFC/T/D][PATCH 2/2] Linux/Guest cooperative unmapped ..., Avi Kivity, (Mon Jun 14, 8:44 am)