| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: Tmem [PATCH 0/5] (Take 3): Transcendent memory
|
To: |
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: Tmem [PATCH 0/5] (Take 3): Transcendent memory |
|
From: |
Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:51:03 +0100 |
|
Cc: |
Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>, sunil.mushran@xxxxxxxxxx, jeremy@xxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tmem-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mm <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, dave.mccracken@xxxxxxxxxx, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>, chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nitin Gupta <ngupta@xxxxxxxxxx>, Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:51:49 -0800 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<f4ab13eb-daaa-40be-82ad-691505b1f169@default> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<20091225191848.GB8438@xxxxxxxxxx> <f4ab13eb-daaa-40be-82ad-691505b1f169@default> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
Hi!
> > achive this using
> > > > some existing infrastructure in kernel.
> > >
> > > Hi Nitin --
> > >
> > > Sorry if I sounded overly negative... too busy around the holidays.
> > >
> > > I'm definitely OK with exploring alternatives. I just think that
> > > existing kernel mechanisms are very firmly rooted in the notion
> > > that either the kernel owns the memory/cache or an asynchronous
> > > device owns it. Tmem falls somewhere in between and is very
> >
> > Well... compcache seems to be very similar to preswap: in preswap case
> > you don't know if hypervisor will have space, in ramzswap you don't
> > know if data are compressible.
>
> Hi Pavel --
>
> Yes there are definitely similarities too. In fact, I started
> prototyping preswap (now called frontswap) with Nitin's
> compcache code. IIRC I ran into some problems with compcache's
> difficulties in dealing with failed "puts" due to dynamic
> changes in size of hypervisor-available-memory.
>
> Nitin may have addressed this in later versions of ramzswap.
That would be cool to find out.
> One feature of frontswap which is different than ramzswap is
> that frontswap acts as a "fronting store" for all configured
> swap devices, including SAN/NAS swap devices. It doesn't
> need to be separately configured as a "highest priority" swap
> device. In many installations and depending on how ramzswap
Ok, I'd call it a bug, not a feature :-).
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home