Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:38:11 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, npiggin@kernel.dk,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, cl@linux.com,
        kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Unmapped page cache control (v5)
Message-ID: <20110401030811.GP2879@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com
References: <20110330052819.8212.1359.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <20110331214033.GA2904@dastard>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110331214033.GA2904@dastard>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1859
Lines: 42

* Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> [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@vger.kernel.org/msg30655.html 

-- 
	Three Cheers,
	Balbir
--
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/