From: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
To: Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andres@lagarcavilla.org>
Cc: adin@gridcentric.ca, andres@gridcentric.ca, keir.xen@gmail.com,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3 of 3] x86/mem_sharing: For shared pages with many references, use a hash table instead of a list
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:35:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120418153530.GM7013@ocelot.phlegethon.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7b606c043208d98d218b.1334240174@xdev.gridcentric.ca>
At 10:16 -0400 on 12 Apr (1334225774), Andres Lagar-Cavilla wrote:
> xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c | 170 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> xen/include/asm-x86/mem_sharing.h | 13 ++-
> 2 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
>
> For shared frames that have many references, the doubly-linked list used to
> store the rmap results in costly scans during unshare operations. To alleviate
> the overhead, replace the linked list by a hash table. However, hash tables are
> space-intensive, so only use them for pages that have "many" (arbitrary
> threshold) references.
>
> Unsharing is heaviliy exercised during domain destroy. In experimental testing,
> for a domain that points over 100 thousand pages to the same shared frame,
> domain destruction dropped from over 7 minutes(!) to less than two seconds.
If you're adding a new datastructure, would it be better to use a tree,
since the keys are easily sorted? Xen already has include/xen/rbtree.h.
It would have a higher per-entry overhead but you wouldn't need to keep
the list datastructure as well for the light-sharing case.
Tim.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-18 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-12 14:16 [PATCH 0 of 3] RFC: x86 memory sharing performance improvements Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-12 14:16 ` [PATCH 1 of 3] x86/mm/sharing: Clean ups for relinquishing shared pages on destroy Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-18 12:42 ` Tim Deegan
2012-04-18 13:06 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-12 14:16 ` [PATCH 2 of 3] x86/mem_sharing: modularize reverse map for shared frames Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-18 14:05 ` Tim Deegan
2012-04-18 14:19 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-12 14:16 ` [PATCH 3 of 3] x86/mem_sharing: For shared pages with many references, use a hash table instead of a list Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-18 15:35 ` Tim Deegan [this message]
2012-04-18 16:18 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-24 19:33 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-04-24 19:48 [PATCH 0 of 3] x86/mem_sharing: Improve performance of rmap, fix cascading bugs Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2012-04-24 19:48 ` [PATCH 3 of 3] x86/mem_sharing: For shared pages with many references, use a hash table instead of a list Andres Lagar-Cavilla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120418153530.GM7013@ocelot.phlegethon.org \
--to=tim@xen.org \
--cc=adin@gridcentric.ca \
--cc=andres@gridcentric.ca \
--cc=andres@lagarcavilla.org \
--cc=keir.xen@gmail.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).