Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751985AbaB0WIQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:08:16 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:39901 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751067AbaB0WIP (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2014 17:08:15 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:08:13 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Dave Hansen Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Linus Torvalds , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , Alexander Viro , Dave Chinner , Ning Qu , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/2] mm: introduce vm_ops->map_pages() Message-Id: <20140227140813.988b225351b91937f840404b@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <530FB55F.2070106@linux.intel.com> References: <1393530827-25450-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <1393530827-25450-2-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <530FB55F.2070106@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.2.0beta5 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 13:59:59 -0800 Dave Hansen wrote: > On 02/27/2014 11:53 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > +#define FAULT_AROUND_ORDER 4 > > +#define FAULT_AROUND_PAGES (1UL << FAULT_AROUND_ORDER) > > +#define FAULT_AROUND_MASK ~((1UL << (PAGE_SHIFT + FAULT_AROUND_ORDER)) - 1) > > Looking at the performance data made me think of this: do we really want > this to be static? It seems like the kind of thing that will cause a > regression _somewhere_. Yes, allowing people to tweak it at runtime would improve testability a lot. I don't think we want to let yet another tunable out into the wild unless we really need to - perhaps a not-for-mainline add-on patch, or something in debugfs so we have the option of taking it away later. > Also, the folks with larger base bage sizes probably don't want a > FAULT_AROUND_ORDER=4. That's 1MB of fault-around for ppc64, for example. Yup, we don't want the same app to trigger dramatically different kernel behaviour when it is moved from x86 to ppc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/