Re: [PATCH RFC] hotplug-memory: refactor online_pages to separatezone growth from page onlining
From: Anthony Liguori
Date: Sat Mar 29 2008 - 20:26:43 EST
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Dave Hansen wrote:
To me, it sounds like the only different thing that you want is to make
sure that only partial sections are onlined. So, shall we work with the
existing interfaces to online partial sections, or will we just disable
it entirely when we see Xen?
Well, yes and no.
For the current balloon driver, it doesn't make much sense. It would
add a fair amount of complexity without any real gain. It's currently
based around alloc_page/free_page. When it wants to shrink the domain
and give memory back to the host, it allocates pages, adds the page
structures to a ballooned pages list, and strips off the backing
memory and gives it to the host. Growing the domain is the converse:
it gets pages from the host, pulls page structures off the list, binds
them together and frees them back to the kernel. If it runs out of
ballooned page structures, it hotplugs in some memory to add more.
That said, if (partial-)sections were much smaller - say 2-4 meg - and
page migration/defrag worked reliably, then we could probably do
without the balloon driver and do it all in terms of memory hot
plug/unplug. That would give us a general mechanism which could
either be driven from userspace, and/or have in-kernel
Xen/kvm/s390/etc policy modules. Aside from small sections, the only
additional requirement would be an online hook which can actually
attach backing memory to the pages being onlined, rather than just
assuming an underlying DIMM as current code does.
Ballooning on KVM (and s390) is very much a different beast from Xen.
With Xen, ballooning is very similar to hotplug in that you're adding
and removing physical memory from the guest. The use of alloc_page() to
implement it instead of hotplug is for the reasons Jeremy's outlined
above. Logically though, it's hotplug.
For KVM and s390, ballooning is really a primitive form of guest page
hinting. The host asks the guest to allocate some memory and the guest
allocates what it can, and then tells the host which pages they were.
It's basically saying the pages are Unused and then the host may move
those pages from Up=>Uz which reduces the resident size of the guest.
The virtual size stays the same though. We can enforce limits on the
resident size of the guest via the new cgroup memory controller.
The guest is free to reclaim those pages at any time it wants without
informing the host. In fact, we plan to utilize this by implementing a
shrinker and OOM handler in the virtio balloon driver.
Hotplug is still useful for us as it's more efficient to hot-add 1gb of
memory instead of starting out with an extra 1gb and ballooning down.
We wouldn't want to hotplug away every page we balloon though as we want
to be able to reclaim them if necessary without the hosts intervention
(like on an OOM condition).
For Xen and KVM, how does it get decided that the guest needs more
memory? Is this guest or host driven? Both? How is the guest
notified? Is guest userspace involved at all?
In Xen, either the host or the guest can set the target size for the
domain, which is capped by the host-set limit. Aside from possibly
setting the target size, there's no usermode involvement in managing
ballooning. The virtio balloon driver is similar, though from a quick
look it seems to be entirely driven by the host side.
The host support for KVM ballooning is entirely in userspace, but that's
orthogonal to the discussion at hand really.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
J
--
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/