On 28.02.25 16:10, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 28.02.25 15:59, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 28.02.25 06:17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 at 19:03, Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'd be fine with SKSM replacing KSM entirely. However, I don't
think we should try to re-implement the existing KSM userspace ABIs
over SKSM.
No, absolutely. The only point (for me) for your new synchronous one
would be if it replaced the kernel thread async scanning, which would
make the old user space interface basically pointless.
But I don't actually know who uses KSM right now. My reaction really
comes from a "it's not nice code in the kernel", not from any actual
knowledge of the users.
Maybe it works really well in some cloud VM environment, and we're
stuck with it forever.
Exactly that; and besides the VM use-case, lately people stated using it in
the context of interpreters (IIRC inside Meta) quite successfully as well.
Does Red Hat (or any other KVM supporters) actually recommend using KSM for VMs
in cloud environments?
Private clouds yes, that's where it is most commonly used for. I would
assume that nobody for
forgot to complete that sentence: "... nobody really should be using
that in public clouds."
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
