Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        "Shaohua Li" <shli@kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
        Zi Yan <zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v4 03/21] mm, THP, swap: Support PMD swap mapping in swap_duplicate()
References: <20180622035151.6676-1-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <20180622035151.6676-4-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <92b86ab6-6f51-97b0-337c-b7e98a30b6cb@linux.intel.com>
        <878t6jio7x.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
        <1b8a9fa8-79a3-c515-26b1-cea6d9eb9aeb@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jul 2018 08:59:40 +0800
In-Reply-To: <1b8a9fa8-79a3-c515-26b1-cea6d9eb9aeb@linux.intel.com> (Dave
        Hansen's message of "Tue, 10 Jul 2018 06:50:33 -0700")
Message-ID: <87pnzuh9j7.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> writes:

>> Yes.  Boolean parameter isn't good at most times.  Matthew Wilcox
>> suggested to use
>> 
>>         swap_duplicate(&entry, HPAGE_PMD_NR);
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>>         swap_duplicate(&entry, 1);
>> 
>> He thinks this makes the interface more flexible to support other swap
>> entry size in the future.  What do you think about that?
>
> That looks great to me too.
>
>>>>  		if (likely(!non_swap_entry(entry))) {
>>>> -			if (swap_duplicate(entry) < 0)
>>>> +			if (swap_duplicate(&entry, false) < 0)
>>>>  				return entry.val;
>>>>  
>>>>  			/* make sure dst_mm is on swapoff's mmlist. */
>>>
>>> I'll also point out that in a multi-hundred-line patch, adding arguments
>>> to a existing function would not be something I'd try to include in the
>>> patch.  I'd break it out separately unless absolutely necessary.
>> 
>> You mean add another patch, which only adds arguments to the function,
>> but not change the body of the function?
>
> Yes.  Or, just add the non-THP-swap version first.

OK, will do this.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying