Re: [RFC] respect the referenced bit of KVM guest pages?

[Balbir Singh]

* Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> [2009-08-16 12:55:22]:

> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:56:39AM +0800, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > 
> > > Right, but I meant busty page allocations and accesses on them, which
> > > can make a large continuous segment of referenced pages in LRU list,
> > > say 50MB.  They may or may not be valuable as a whole, however a local
> > > algorithm may keep the first 4MB and drop the remaining 46MB.
> > 
> > I wonder if the problem is that we simply do not keep a large
> > enough inactive list in Jeff's test.  If we do not, pages do
> > not have a chance to be referenced again before the reclaim
> > code comes in.
> 
> Exactly, that's the case I call the list FIFO.
> 
> > The cgroup stats should show how many active anon and inactive
> > anon pages there are in the cgroup.
> 
> Jeff, can you have a look at these stats? Thanks!

Another experiment would be to toy with memory.swappiness (although
defaults should work well). Could you compare the in-guest values of
nr_*active* with the cgroup values as seen by the host?

-- 
	Balbir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/