From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] add ksm kernel shared memory driver. Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:51:14 -0500 Message-ID: <49D24A02.6070000@codemonkey.ws> References: <1238457560-7613-5-git-send-email-ieidus@redhat.com> <49D17C04.9070307@codemonkey.ws> <49D20B63.8020709@redhat.com> <49D21B33.4070406@codemonkey.ws> <20090331142533.GR9137@random.random> <49D22A9D.4050403@codemonkey.ws> <20090331150218.GS9137@random.random> <49D23224.9000903@codemonkey.ws> <20090331151845.GT9137@random.random> <49D23CD1.9090208@codemonkey.ws> <20090331162525.GU9137@random.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Izik Eidus , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, avi@redhat.com, chrisw@redhat.com, riel@redhat.com, jeremy@goop.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, hugh@veritas.com, corbet@lwn.net, yaniv@redhat.com, dmonakhov@openvz.org To: Andrea Arcangeli Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090331162525.GU9137@random.random> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:54:57AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> You can still disable ksm and simply return ENOSYS for the MADV_ flag. You >> > > -EINVAL if something, -ENOSYS would tell userland that it shall stop > trying to use madvise, including the other MADV_ too. > > >> could even keep it as a module if you liked by separating the madvise bits >> from the ksm bits. The madvise() bits could just provide the tracking >> infrastructure for determine which vmas were currently marked as sharable. >> You could then have ksm as loadable module that consumed that interface to >> then perform scanning. >> > > What's the point of making ksm a module if one has part of ksm code > loaded in the kernel and not being possible to avoid compiling in? > People that says KSM=N in their .config (like embedded running with 1M > of ram), don't want that tracking overhead compiled into the kernel. > You have two things here. CONFIG_MEM_SHARABLE and CONFIG_KSM. CONFIG_MEM_SHARABLE cannot be a module. If it's set to =n, then madvise(MADV_SHARABLE) == -ENOSYS. If CONFIG_MEM_SHARABLE=y, then madvise(MADV_SHARABLE) will keep track of all sharable memory regions. Independently of that, CONFIG_KSM can be set to n,m,y. It depends on CONFIG_MEM_SHARABLE and when it's loaded, it consumes the list of sharable vmas. But honestly, CONFIG_MEM_SHARABLE shouldn't a lot of code so I don't see why you'd even need to make it configable. >> A number of MADV_ flags are Linux specific (like >> MADV_DOFORK/MADV_DONTFORK). >> > > But those aren't kernel module related, so they're in line with the > standard ones and could be adapted by other OS. > > KSM is not a core VM functionality, madvise is a core VM > functionality, so I don't see fit. KSM as ioctl or KSM creating > /proc//ksm when loaded, sounds fine to me instead. If open of > either one fails, application won't register in. It's up to you to > choose KSM=M/N, if you want it as core functionality just build as > KSM=Y but leave the option to others to save memory. > The ioctl() interface is quite bad for what you're doing. You're telling the kernel extra information about a VA range in userspace. That's what madvise is for. You're tweaking simple read/write values of kernel infrastructure. That's what sysfs is for. Regards, Anthony Liguori -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org