From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S1751616AbWGZNEJ@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751616AbWGZNEJ (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Wed, 26 Jul 2006 09:04:09 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751620AbWGZNEJ
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 26 Jul 2006 09:04:09 -0400
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.171]:29986 "EHLO
	ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751617AbWGZNEH (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 26 Jul 2006 09:04:07 -0400
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=googlemail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=cQ96YydVSdLZ/Uy8TpbRVJ/jeqm9aOlZ/imReharg0QT1Hc2yt723tcgDEtPjzZ2SZMEO2ZWOmU8FQL1xgnQhzJd0qECewcgPxAFNPEvVI6i1wHeIys1lCPn26teNfQm+8OhRu8QN6lOAUo/wWsRcgkZ9HrUK2PdiYukqIZ/An0=
Message-ID: <6e0cfd1d0607260604w3e8636e4taaea4bc918397b34@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:04:05 +0200
From: "Martin Schwidefsky" <schwidefsky@googlemail.com>
To: "Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: inactive-clean list
Cc: "Rik van Riel" <riel@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
       "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@osdl.org>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@osdl.org>,
       linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1153912268.2732.30.camel@taijtu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1153167857.31891.78.camel@lappy> <44C30E33.2090402@redhat.com>
	 <6e0cfd1d0607260400r731489a1tfd9e6c5a197fb0bd@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1153912268.2732.30.camel@taijtu>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 7/26/06, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> > Hmm, I wonder how the inactive clean list helps in regard to the fast
> > host reclaim
> > scheme. In particular since the memory pressure that triggers the
> > reclaim is in the
> > host, not in the guest. So all pages might be on the active list but
> > the host still
> > wants to be able to discard pages.
> >
>
> I think Rik would want to set all the already unmapped pages to volatile
> state in the hypervisor.
>
> These pages can be dropped without loss of information on the guest
> system since they are all already on a backing-store, be it regular
> files or swap.

I guessed that as well. It isn't good enough. Consider a guest with a
large (virtual) memory size and a host with a small physical memory
size. The guest will never put any page on the inactive_clean list
because it does not have memory pressure. vmscan will never run. The
host wants to reclaim memory of the guest, but since the
inactive_clean list is empty it will find only stable pages.

-- 
blue skies,
  Martin