From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: Xen balloon driver improvement (version 1)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:44:32 +0100
Message-ID: <5448EA20.2040504@citrix.com>
References: <20141022162930.GA8489@zion.uk.xensource.com>	
	<5447EA49.2080008@citrix.com>	
	<20141022182929.GA29147@zion.uk.xensource.com>
	<1414062040.19198.38.camel@citrix.com>
	<5448E98B.5020207@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <5448E98B.5020207@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 23/10/14 12:42, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 23/10/14 12:00, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Wed, 2014-10-22 at 19:29 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
>>
>>>>> For instance, balloon driver can maintain three queues:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. queue for 2 MB pages
>>>>> 1. queue for 4 KB pages (delegated to core balloon driver)
>>>>> 1. queue for pages used to mapped pages from other domain
>>>> What about 1GB pages?
>>>>
>>> I wouldn't bother with 1GB pages here.
>> Guests which don't have special privileges are limited to 2M contiguous
>> allocations anyway, to stop them from consuming "precious" higher order
>> mappings.
>>
>> I'm not sure that's still worthwhile (e.g. is it valid on ARM or
>> shadow/HAP x86? I'm not sure).
>>
>>> It would require too much work to coalesce 4KB pages to 1GB pages. 
>> FWIW in practice You'd probably coalesce 4K pages into 2M  and then 2M
>> into 1G.
>>
>>
> 
> Wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to run a 1GB PVH guest on a 1GB HAP
> mapping, with the PVH guest making use of 2MB mapping where possible.
> 
> PVH (ought) to be able to do away with the MTRR caching issues, the
> legacy IO regions, and so long as the guest doesn't balloon pages out or
> map a foreign grant, it won't shatter the host superpage.
> 
> But in principle, I agree that making better use of 2MB pages is more
> important than considering 1GB pages at the moment.

IMO, if you're that concerned about eking out the last bit of
performance out of a guest you probably won't be ballooning.

David