Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp4050534ybv; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:19:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqygRs3DAlfj52cxyn7pMCKX//kIIGHzlzVbuaLhAPwgmR2n7tOlg9p8+K5OLh2WkkLatOMs X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5786:: with SMTP id q6mr2123283oth.164.1581362358241; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:19:18 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581362358; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=0vyL3tgVTqJ+WwYRvXxatPWZCMxy3UdfRSqmHXxrFRM4kQF0O9Ys9GtVhYR4ba02Ro jTuUc4T5AI6rMEhBWzRktit8BoSYwdufvZyZU+i9aMdbMp1Bera7IOqaZtml+crIXgV3 bJ5W0uKgV5Oox15qZiAbEBtwNafsql9Qlp2UAASB9EEOf1BOOLUpbh58x7LT3i/dbqPT MlnLiS52l8ej7ce15+RA0a+IwD3XQFIe2HEQ3nG/IRjG2CfcAZUfjzrmmXGZsnm6waoz kvmkMpFblzB+vbvvwEN/mTr8KMpwv/hixh9kg+mEGv+hgp7IHXlnUu3G6SbRQHuKW1tx ZOdA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :message-id; bh=KFMTbbQ1OOAK+Ss+hhRFF8+03XtTVgmPSC7QxG9/RJs=; b=tXwW1uzFgBm/yyTYPx4Y0DxdZ7M8FoV3b3xUN4DFuO+x7GUgdSEOZ+s7y+XC80mvxG TmmZNkwgChtG8sb5TC/kw2pRCiEb463bQ3qIxyz6LKAlO+ZzU2Hcyf4JWipkqEGu63zK Gf9kqxNyNsl7vSYgUn35xzDskLjCSc9pnpeco9yDotX906r3WysOdl3ftVejIIVRAsfF a/LFPftXoZd2tLjvBFO4qivjE3srWc6RispXzcZNxLNMMpSPZfPvnHo9Tmit5eOF412g /0a8uue6GBC4ASEAxuvia8x/ZpRlh3CUIRtDVRekUFRvwcNUSPxa0I5qehnCVxQa3He/ 2ptg== 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=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b18si615703otp.17.2020.02.10.11.19.06; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:19:18 -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=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727617AbgBJTTB (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:19:01 -0500 Received: from mga18.intel.com ([134.134.136.126]:50779 "EHLO mga18.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727056AbgBJTTA (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:19:00 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Feb 2020 11:19:00 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,426,1574150400"; d="scan'208";a="405682140" Received: from ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com ([10.7.198.76]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Feb 2020 11:18:59 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Should I repost? (was: Re: [PATCH v16.1 0/9] mm / virtio: Provide support for free page reporting) From: Alexander Duyck To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net, david@redhat.com Cc: yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com, nitesh@redhat.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, pagupta@redhat.com, riel@surriel.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, wei.w.wang@intel.com, aarcange@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, osalvador@suse.de, vbabka@suse.cz, AlexanderDuyck , kvm@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:18:59 -0800 In-Reply-To: <6758b1e3373fc06b37af1c87901237974d52322f.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <20200122173040.6142.39116.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <6758b1e3373fc06b37af1c87901237974d52322f.camel@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.5 (3.32.5-1.fc30) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 14:05 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Wed, 2020-01-22 at 09:43 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > This series provides an asynchronous means of reporting free guest pages > > to a hypervisor so that the memory associated with those pages can be > > dropped and reused by other processes and/or guests on the host. Using > > this it is possible to avoid unnecessary I/O to disk and greatly improve > > performance in the case of memory overcommit on the host. > > > > > A brief history on the background of free page reporting can be found at: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/29f43d5796feed0dec8e8bb98b187d9dac03b900.camel@linux.intel.com/ > > > > Changes from v14: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191119214454.24996.66289.stgit@localhost.localdomain/ > > Renamed "unused page reporting" to "free page reporting" > > Updated code, kconfig, and patch descriptions > > Split out patch for __free_isolated_page > > Renamed function to __putback_isolated_page > > Rewrote core reporting functionality > > Added logic to reschedule worker in 2 seconds instead of run to completion > > Removed reported_pages statistics > > Removed REPORTING_REQUESTED bit used in zone flags > > Replaced page_reporting_dev_info refcount with state variable > > Removed scatterlist from page_reporting_dev_info > > Removed capacity from page reporting device > > Added dynamic scatterlist allocation/free at start/end of reporting process > > Updated __free_one_page so that reported pages are not always added to tail > > Added logic to handle error from report function > > Updated virtio-balloon patch that adds support for page reporting > > Updated patch description to try and highlight differences in approaches > > Updated logic to reflect that we cannot limit the scatterlist from device > > Added logic to return error from report function > > Moved documentation patch to end of patch set > > > > Changes from v15: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191205161928.19548.41654.stgit@localhost.localdomain/ > > Rebased on linux-next-20191219 > > Split out patches for budget and moving head to last page processed > > Updated budget code to reduce how much memory is reported per pass > > Added logic to also rotate the list if we exit due a page isolation failure > > Added migratetype as argument in __putback_isolated_page > > > > Changes from v16: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200103210509.29237.18426.stgit@localhost.localdomain/ > > Rebased on linux-next-20200122 > > Updated patch 2 to to account for removal of pr_info in __isolate_free_page > > Updated patch title for patches 7, 8, and 9 to use prefix mm/page_reporting > > No code changes other than conflict resolution for patch 2 > > So I thought I would put out a gentle nudge since it has been about 4 > weeks since v16 was submitted, a little over a week and a half for v16.1, > and I have yet to get any feedback on the code contained in the patchset. > Codewise nothing has changed from the v16 patchset other than rebasing it > off of the linux-next tree to resolve some merge conflicts that I saw > recently, and discussion around v16.1 was mostly about next steps and how > to deal with the page cache instead of discussing the code itself. > > The full patchset can be found at: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200122173040.6142.39116.stgit@localhost.localdomain/ > > I believe I still need review feedback for patches 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9. > > Thanks. > > - Alex So I had posted this patch set a few days before Linus's merge window opened. When I posted it the discussion was about what the follow-up on this patch set will be in terms of putting pressure on the page cache to force it to shrink. However I didn't get any review comments on the code itself. My last understanding on this patch set is that I am waiting on patch feedback from Mel Gorman as he had the remaining requests that led to most of the changes in v15 and v16. I believe I have addressed them, but I don't believe he has had a chance to review them. I am wondering now if it is still possible to either get it reviewed and/or applied without reposting, or do I need to repost it since it has been several weeks since I submitted it? The patch set still applies to the linux-next tree without any issues. Thanks. - Alex