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

[Pavel Machek]

> > If block layer overhead is a problem, go ahead and optimize it instead
> > of adding new interfaces to bypass it.  Though I expect it wouldn't be
> > needed, and if any optimization needs to be done it is in the swap
> > layer.
> > Optimizing swap has the additional benefit of improving performance on
> > flash-backed swap.
> >  :
> > What happens when no tmem is available?  you swap to a volume.  That's
> > the disk size needed.
> >  :
> > You're dynamic swap is limited too.  And no, no guest modifications.
> 
> You keep saying you are going to implement all of the dynamic features
> of frontswap with no changes to the guest and no copying and no
> host-swapping.  You are being disingenuous.  VMware has had a lot

I don't see why no copying is a requirement. I believe requirement
should be "it is fast enough".
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/