Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753696AbYCLN1W (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:27:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751485AbYCLN1J (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:27:09 -0400 Received: from mtagate3.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.152]:19622 "EHLO mtagate3.de.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751437AbYCLN1I (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 09:27:08 -0400 Message-Id: <20080312132132.520833247@de.ibm.com> User-Agent: quilt/0.46-1 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:21:32 +0100 From: Martin Schwidefsky To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.osdl.org Cc: akpm@osdl.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, hugh@veritas.com, zach@vmware.com, frankeh@watson.ibm.com Subject: [patch 0/6] Guest page hinting version 6. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2310 Lines: 49 Greetings, I've dedusted the guest page hinting patches and ported them to todays upstream git tree. There is one reject if applied to 2.6.24-rc5-mm1 but that is easy to fix. The code stills works as expected on my test system. Our z/VM performance team recently published a report on guest page hinting vs. the ballooner approach on SLES10 for a farm of web servers. The code on SLES10 differs a bit from the upstream variant but the performance results should be still valid. You will find the report here: http://www.vm.ibm.com/perf/reports/zvm/html/530cmm.html (the VMRM-CMM the web page speaks about is the balloon approach, CMMA is the guest page hinting). Both approaches to the memory overcommit problem show comparable benefits for this workload, with an advantage for guest page hinting for large number of guests. For other workloads your mileage may vary. The main benefit for guest page hinting vs. the ballooner is that there is no need for a monitor that keeps track of the memory usage of all the guests, a complex algorithm that calculates the working set sizes and for the calls into the guest kernel to control the size of the balloons. The host just does normal LRU based paging. If the host picks one of the pages the guest can recreate, the host can throw it away instead of writing it to the paging device. Simple and elegant. The main disadvantage is the added complexity that is introduced to the guests memory management code to do the page state changes and to deal with discard faults. The last versions of the patches do not differ much, I consider the code to be stable. My question now is how to proceed with the code. I sure would love to see the code going upstream some day but that depends on the mm developers as the code adds complexity that needs to be supported. If the general feeling is that the advantages of this approach do not warrent for the added complexity this will likely be the last time you will hear about guest page hinting. -- blue skies, Martin. "Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/