Re: [PATCH 0/3] Unmapped page cache control (v5)

From: Balbir Singh
Date: Thu Mar 31 2011 - 23:24:08 EST


* Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2011-04-01 08:40:33]:

> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:00:26AM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >
> > The following series implements page cache control,
> > this is a split out version of patch 1 of version 3 of the
> > page cache optimization patches posted earlier at
> > Previous posting http://lwn.net/Articles/425851/ and analysis
> > at http://lwn.net/Articles/419713/
> >
> > Detailed Description
> > ====================
> > This patch implements unmapped page cache control via preferred
> > page cache reclaim. The current patch hooks into kswapd and reclaims
> > page cache if the user has requested for unmapped page control.
> > This is useful in the following scenario
> > - In a virtualized environment with cache=writethrough, we see
> > double caching - (one in the host and one in the guest). As
> > we try to scale guests, cache usage across the system grows.
> > The goal of this patch is to reclaim page cache when Linux is running
> > as a guest and get the host to hold the page cache and manage it.
> > There might be temporary duplication, but in the long run, memory
> > in the guests would be used for mapped pages.
>
> What does this do that "cache=none" for the VMs and using the page
> cache inside the guest doesn't acheive? That avoids double caching
> and doesn't require any new complexity inside the host OS to
> acheive...
>

There was a long discussion on cache=none in the first posting and the
downsides/impact on throughput. Please see
http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg30655.html

--
Three Cheers,
Balbir
--
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/