Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 4/7] UBC: syscalls (user interface) | From | Magnus Damm <> | Date | Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:58:07 +0900 |
| |
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 18:16 -0700, Rohit Seth wrote: > On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 11:47 +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 07:45 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 12:08 +0400, Andrey Savochkin wrote: > > > > > > > > A) Have separate memory management for each container, > > > > with separate buddy allocator, lru lists, page replacement mechanism. > > > > That implies a considerable overhead, and the main challenge there > > > > is sharing of pages between these separate memory managers. > > > > > > Hold on here for just a sec... > > > > > > It is quite possible to do memory management aimed at one container > > > while that container's memory still participates in the main VM. > > > > > > There is overhead here, as the LRU scanning mechanisms get less > > > efficient, but I'd rather pay a penalty at LRU scanning time than divide > > > up the VM, or coarsely start failing allocations. > > > > This could of course be solved with one LRU per container, which is how > > the CKRM memory controller implemented things about a year ago. > > Effectively Andrew's idea of faking up nodes is also giving per > container LRUs.
Yes, but the NUMA emulation approach is using fixed size containers where the size is selectable at the kernel command line, while the CKRM (and pzone) approach provides a more dynamic (and complex) solution.
/ magnus
- 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/
| |