Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp7294781imu; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 10:31:53 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/VmADayVq1Mzb8ta2ZF0ppxGq4mdoM2BMgXqHkh7XinT3VCID5ME5gQTQq48tJ9ohaAKtqq X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9692:: with SMTP id n18mr17369252plp.333.1543861913001; Mon, 03 Dec 2018 10:31:53 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1543861912; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mtbUnInWmBItwmn7W+r6YoueCeUU9uYl0JH+XyJDiQY9cWkckeJj0icTvXADojooF2 TlA8YAAPliF+NXNkGjFV5Zijesxdv8Ruzy3MvSDhtR8ZInhzneoLJyH6w9jTGgnEyOkn qyn/4h0utPZmpd93RDpp2sEcXt50bWlIlAA04+XLIGXBG8R4337Dot2GmUmSUb48U0N/ kBzJ0dv/p4DDGjSuB7o7u47wKJ7iSOTwzERvUUHWYUDZY+nCiLZuNZ8wnlIkpWdWGR9w WhKxhpm+Y6IuLHYav/y4I4PC4VpAIjjfX6YL0k/Qi+FaqEwsHOX+oA+cdmijWAZV9xDS UB2w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=tBmKPpWy93x4ogd8SkoGOWuJXFKacZHaa8ismtC7xac=; b=Z6luY0ptLVxEcXSQvF+KA4oiWORoQr6DCMpo1Gf7gJUdMeQfr+vgdjDo+EP2AwJh+V tuoj0JFTMTql3gi5LRpFZ/wyo4SIughjM3tK/dsmrEPr00xfrmgdQEy+tTJs/NMErGWb cT50g0hVDan6f7tR9eSf+gaAQLtrwcZ6HjtmCekgIKB7SuLqAYIBBRcut60hg41gDgf4 LR0sRjsjrGiYyJyYLSHMyum0YTTH8p6Eul2xeaz90nLRd3WIdcp3wbgUzg0NgUuPVksZ EAkKDGrV1rEq/74MkxTxYs7nDU/chFfX0iUZLAIMVv5zR3FioDqT3Dyb5pXicdnNN3YH Fb7g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x9si13977927pll.131.2018.12.03.10.31.30; Mon, 03 Dec 2018 10:31:52 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726679AbeLCSa4 (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 3 Dec 2018 13:30:56 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:43630 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726365AbeLCSaz (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Dec 2018 13:30:55 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CCA1B025; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 18:30:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 19:30:50 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Linus Torvalds Cc: ying.huang@intel.com, Andrea Arcangeli , s.priebe@profihost.ag, mgorman@techsingularity.net, Linux List Kernel Mailing , alex.williamson@redhat.com, lkp@01.org, David Rientjes , kirill@shutemov.name, Andrew Morton , zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu, Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: [LKP] [mm] ac5b2c1891: vm-scalability.throughput -61.3% regression Message-ID: <20181203183050.GL31738@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20181127062503.GH6163@shao2-debian> <20181127205737.GI16136@redhat.com> <87tvk1yjkp.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> <20181203181456.GK31738@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 03-12-18 10:19:55, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:15 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > The thing is that there is no universal win here. There are two > > different types of workloads and we cannot satisfy both. > > Ok, if that's the case, then I'll just revert the commit. > > Michal, our rules are very simple: we don't generate regressions. It's > better to have old reliable behavior than to start creating *new* > problems. I do not get it. 5265047ac301 which this patch effectively reverts has regressed kvm workloads. People started to notice only later because they were not running on kernels with that commit until later. We have 4.4 based kernels reports. What do you propose to do for those people? Let me remind that it was David who introduced 5265047ac301, presumably because his workload benefits from it. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs