Re: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview

[Dave Hansen]

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 10:13 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/30/2010 04:45 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >
> > A large portion of CMM2's gain came from the fact that you could take
> > memory away from guests without _them_ doing any work.  If the system is
> > experiencing a load spike, you increase load even more by making the
> > guests swap.  If you can just take some of their memory away, you can
> > smooth that spike out.  CMM2 and frontswap do that.  The guests
> > explicitly give up page contents that the hypervisor does not have to
> > first consult with the guest before discarding.
> >    
> 
> Frontswap does not do this.  Once a page has been frontswapped, the host 
> is committed to retaining it until the guest releases it.  It's really 
> not very different from a synchronous swap device.
> 
> I think cleancache allows the hypervisor to drop pages without the 
> guest's immediate knowledge, but I'm not sure.

Gah.  You're right.  I'm  reading the two threads and confusing the
concepts.  I'm a bit less mystified why the discussion is revolving
around the swap device so much. :)

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/