From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@suse.de, akpm@osdl.org,
jeremy@goop.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com,
tmem-devel@oss.oracle.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-mm@kvack.org, kurt.hackel@oracle.com,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
dave.mccracken@oracle.com, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
sunil.mushran@oracle.com, Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
chris.mason@oracle.com, Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] (Take 2): transcendent memory ("tmem") for Linux
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 12:20:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A59AAF1.1030102@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d693761e-2f2b-4d8c-ae4f-7f22479f6c0f@default>
On 07/10/2009 06:23 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>> If there was one change to tmem that would make it more
>> palatable, for
>> me it would be changing the way pools are "allocated". Instead of
>> getting an opaque handle from the hypervisor, I would force
>> the guest to
>> allocate it's own memory and to tell the hypervisor that it's a tmem
>> pool.
>>
>
> An interesting idea but one of the nice advantages of tmem being
> completely external to the OS is that the tmem pool may be much
> larger than the total memory available to the OS. As an extreme
> example, assume you have one 1GB guest on a physical machine that
> has 64GB physical RAM. The guest now has 1GB of directly-addressable
> memory and 63GB of indirectly-addressable memory through tmem.
> That 63GB requires no page structs or other data structures in the
> guest. And in the current (external) implementation, the size
> of each pool is constantly changing, sometimes dramatically so
> the guest would have to be prepared to handle this. I also wonder
> if this would make shared-tmem-pools more difficult.
>
Having no struct pages is also a downside; for example this guest cannot
have more than 1GB of anonymous memory without swapping like mad.
Swapping to tmem is fast but still a lot slower than having the memory
available.
tmem makes life a lot easier to the hypervisor and to the guest, but
also gives up a lot of flexibility. There's a difference between memory
and a very fast synchronous backing store.
> I can see how it might be useful for KVM though. Once the
> core API and all the hooks are in place, a KVM implementation of
> tmem could attempt something like this.
>
My worry is that tmem for kvm leaves a lot of niftiness on the table,
since it was designed for a hypervisor with much simpler memory
management. kvm can already use spare memory for backing guest swap,
and can already convert unused guest memory to free memory (by swapping
it). tmem doesn't really integrate well with these capabilities.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-12 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-07 16:17 Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-07 17:28 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-07 19:53 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-08 22:56 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-08 23:31 ` [Xen-devel] " Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-08 23:57 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-09 0:17 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-07-09 0:27 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-09 1:20 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-09 21:09 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-09 21:27 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-09 21:48 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-09 21:41 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-09 22:34 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-09 22:45 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-09 23:33 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-10 15:23 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-12 9:20 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2009-07-12 16:28 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-12 17:27 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-12 20:59 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-12 13:28 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-12 16:20 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-12 17:16 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-12 19:34 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-13 20:17 ` Chris Mason
2009-07-13 20:38 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-13 20:38 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-13 21:01 ` Chris Mason
2009-07-13 21:17 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-07-26 15:00 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-12 20:39 ` [Xen-devel] " Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-12 20:43 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-12 21:08 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-13 11:33 ` Avi Kivity
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A59AAF1.1030102@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=dave.mccracken@oracle.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=kurt.hackel@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sunil.mushran@oracle.com \
--cc=tmem-devel@oss.oracle.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox