On Fri 08 May 2015 11:47:00 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> There's also the problem that with a single chunk of memory for all
>> cache tables it's not so easy to free individual entries.
>
> That's one of the reasons why I suggested to fix the problem by using
> mmap() for the individual entries r
Am 08.05.2015 um 11:00 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben:
> On Fri 24 Apr 2015 03:04:06 PM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>
> >> >> I think it would be nice to have a way to free unused cache
> >> >> entries after a while.
> >> >
> >> > Do you think mmap plus a periodic timer would work?
> >> >
> >> > I'm
On Fri 24 Apr 2015 03:04:06 PM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> >> I think it would be nice to have a way to free unused cache
>> >> entries after a while.
>> >
>> > Do you think mmap plus a periodic timer would work?
>> >
>> > I'm hesitant about changes like this because they make QEMU more
>> > compl
Am 24.04.2015 um 14:50 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben:
> On Fri 24 Apr 2015 02:37:21 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>
> >> I think it would be nice to have a way to free unused cache entries
> >> after a while.
> >
> > Do you think mmap plus a periodic timer would work?
> >
> > I'm hesitant about
On Fri 24 Apr 2015 02:37:21 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> I think it would be nice to have a way to free unused cache entries
>> after a while.
>
> Do you think mmap plus a periodic timer would work?
>
> I'm hesitant about changes like this because they make QEMU more
> complex, slow down the
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> On Fri 24 Apr 2015 11:52:14 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>
>>> The posix_memalign() call wastes memory. I compared:
>>>
>>> posix_memalign(&memptr, 65536, 2560 * 65536);
>>> memset(memptr, 0, 2560 * 65536);
>>>
>>> with:
>>>
>>> for (
On Fri 24 Apr 2015 11:52:14 AM CEST, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> The posix_memalign() call wastes memory. I compared:
>>
>> posix_memalign(&memptr, 65536, 2560 * 65536);
>> memset(memptr, 0, 2560 * 65536);
>>
>> with:
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < 2560; i++) {
>> posix_memalign(&memptr, 65536, 6
Am 24.04.2015 um 11:26 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> The posix_memalign() call wastes memory. I compared:
>
> posix_memalign(&memptr, 65536, 2560 * 65536);
> memset(memptr, 0, 2560 * 65536);
>
> with:
>
> for (i = 0; i < 2560; i++) {
> posix_memalign(&memptr, 65536, 65536);
>
Am 24.04.2015 um 11:26 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 01:50:28PM +0200, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> > On Thu 23 Apr 2015 12:15:04 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >
> > >> For a cache size of 128MB, the PSS is actually ~10MB larger without
> > >> the patch, which seems to
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 01:50:28PM +0200, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> On Thu 23 Apr 2015 12:15:04 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>
> >> For a cache size of 128MB, the PSS is actually ~10MB larger without
> >> the patch, which seems to come from posix_memalign().
> >
> > Do you mean RSS or are you usi
On Thu 23 Apr 2015 12:15:04 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> For a cache size of 128MB, the PSS is actually ~10MB larger without
>> the patch, which seems to come from posix_memalign().
>
> Do you mean RSS or are you using a tool that reports a "PSS" number
> that I don't know about?
>
> We shou
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 04:37:15PM +0200, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> On Wed 22 Apr 2015 12:26:02 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>
> >> Large disk images need large L2 caches in order to maximize their I/O
> >> performance. However setting a correct size for the cache is not
> >> necessarily easy sin
On Wed 22 Apr 2015 12:26:02 PM CEST, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> Large disk images need large L2 caches in order to maximize their I/O
>> performance. However setting a correct size for the cache is not
>> necessarily easy since apart from the image size, it also depends on
>> other factors like its
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 06:20:39PM +0300, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> Large disk images need large L2 caches in order to maximize their
> I/O performance. However setting a correct size for the cache is not
> necessarily easy since apart from the image size, it also depends
> on other factors like its
Large disk images need large L2 caches in order to maximize their
I/O performance. However setting a correct size for the cache is not
necessarily easy since apart from the image size, it also depends
on other factors like its usage patterns or whether it's part of a
backing chain.
In order to be
15 matches
Mail list logo
