[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 6 of 8 [RFC]] libxc: introduce xc_domain_move_memory
On mar, 2013-04-09 at 09:13 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > What about the following approach: > In general, I like it... More details below. > - do the migration in chunks (like 1GB, may be configurable) > Yes, provided these chunks are big enough, I think the overhead of is acceptable. > - don't move pages which are already on one of the target nodes > Yep, that is definitely sane, and was already on my TODO list (although, you're right, I forgot to mention it in the cover or in the various changelogs). It's not there yet because I'm missing a way of knowing on what node a page is, but I'm already working of putting it together. Anyway, I agree on this too, and thanks for pointing that out. :-) > - try to allocate memory on the target node while the domain is still running. > If this fails, there is no need to move that chunk. Depending on the page > size requirements (huge pages) decide whether the move is aborted or done > partially. > - in case of successful allocation suspend the domain, do the copy and update > page tables for the copied pages, then resume the domain > This is also fine, the only issue being that I'd probably need to fiddle with the domain max_mem, and stuff like that, wouldn't I? I'm saying this because, when testing the few that I sent already, I run right into this when I was trying to do it in the allocate-copy-deallocate order (of course, depending on how big a chunk is, but this is going to be much less than 1GB!). Do you see what I mean? Do you think it would be nice to increase the domain's "memory allowance" (temporarily, of course) for this to be possible? > - free the memory chunk on the old node(s) > - repeat until either no memory obtained or move is finished > > This will have higher overhead, but the domain will be suspended for only > short periods of time. The memory requirements don't matter, as the additional > memory will be allocated only for a short period of time. > Yep, this all makes sense, with the only nit being the max_mem issue above. Thanks again and Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) Attachment:
signature.asc _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |