Re: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview

[Avi Kivity]

On 04/22/2010 06:48 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > a synchronous concurrency-safe page-oriented pseudo-RAM device (such
> > >   :
> > > conform to certain policies as follows:
> > >        
> > How baked in is the synchronous requirement?  Memory, for example, can
> > be asynchronous if it is copied by a dma engine, and since there are
> > hardware encryption engines, there may be hardware compression engines
> > in the future.
> >      
> Thanks for the comment!
>
> Synchronous is required, but likely could be simulated by ensuring all
> coherency (and concurrency) requirements are met by some intermediate
> "buffering driver" -- at the cost of an extra page copy into a buffer
> and overhead of tracking the handles (poolid/inode/index) of pages in
> the buffer that are "in flight".  This is an approach we are considering
> to implement an SSD backend, but hasn't been tested yet so, ahem, the
> proof will be in the put'ing. ;-)
>    

Well, copying memory so you can use a zero-copy dma engine is 
counterproductive.

Much easier to simulate an asynchronous API with a synchronous backend.

--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/