[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] respect the referenced bit of KVM guest pages?
On 08/06/2009 04:06 PM, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 07:44:01PM +0800, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 08/06/2009 01:59 PM, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> scheme KEEP_MOST:
>>> How about, for every N pages that you scan, evict at least 1 page,
>>> regardless of young bit status? That limits overscanning to a N:1
>>> ratio. With N=250 we'll spend at most 25 usec in order to locate one
>>> page to evict.
>>> This is a quick hack to materialize the idea. It remembers roughly
>>> the last 32*SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX=1024 active (mapped) pages scanned,
>>> and if _all of them_ are referenced, then the referenced bit is
>>> probably meaningless and should not be taken seriously.

Or one scheme, with N=parameter.

>> I don't think we should ignore the referenced bit. There could still be
>> a large batch of unreferenced pages later on that we should
>> preferentially swap. If we swap at least 1 page for every 250 scanned,
>> after 4K swaps we will have traversed 1M pages, enough to find them.
> I guess both schemes have unacceptable flaws.
> For JVM/BIGMEM workload, most pages would be found referenced _all the time_.
> So the KEEP_MOST scheme could increase reclaim overheads by N=250 times;
> while the DROP_CONTINUOUS scheme is effectively zero cost.

Maybe 250 is an exaggeration. But even with 250, the cost is still
pretty low compared to the cpu cost of evicting a page (with IPIs and
tlb flushes).

error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-06 15:45    [W:0.178 / U:12.936 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site