From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx107.postini.com [74.125.245.107]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2FE0E6B0007 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:07:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id uo5so1805513pbc.25 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:07:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:07:15 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] ksm: NUMA trees and page migration In-Reply-To: <20130128155452.16882a6e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20130128155452.16882a6e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Gleb Natapov , Petr Holasek , Andrea Arcangeli , Izik Eidus , Rik van Riel , David Rientjes , Anton Arapov , Mel Gorman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:53:10 -0800 (PST) > Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > Here's a KSM series > > Sanity check: do you have a feeling for how useful KSM is? > Performance/space improvements for typical (or atypical) workloads? > Are people using it? Successfully? > > IOW, is it justifying itself? I have no idea! To me it's simply a technical challenge - and I agree with your implication that that's not a good enough justification. I've added Marcelo and Gleb and the KVM list to the Cc: my understanding is that it's the KVM guys who really appreciate KSM. Hugh -- 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