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;
IronPort-SDR: H53N5QpDKI5MamzQr6yc0Yjhy9NaBhIYeKmGDRzv8TSaaHLlS9BjzeKh3xxENRdj94wrjCuZnU
 LXACy6IFyMvA==
From:   SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
CC:     SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "SeongJae Park" <sjpark@amazon.de>, <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>, <acme@kernel.org>,
        <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>, <amit@kernel.org>,
        <brendan.d.gregg@gmail.com>, <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        <cai@lca.pw>, <colin.king@canonical.com>, <corbet@lwn.net>,
        <dwmw@amazon.com>, <jolsa@redhat.com>, <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        <mark.rutland@arm.com>, <mgorman@suse.de>, <minchan@kernel.org>,
        <mingo@redhat.com>, <namhyung@kernel.org>, <peterz@infradead.org>,
        <rdunlap@infradead.org>, <rientjes@google.com>,
        <rostedt@goodmis.org>, <shuah@kernel.org>, <sj38.park@gmail.com>,
        <vbabka@suse.cz>, <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v6 04/14] mm/damon: Apply dynamic memory mapping changes
Date:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:53:55 +0100
Message-ID: <20200310115355.23840-1-sjpark@amazon.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200310090026.00005ea9@Huawei.com> (raw)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:00:26 +0000 Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 13:30:37 +0100
> SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>
> > 
> > Only a number of parts in the virtual address space of the processes is
> > mapped to physical memory and accessed.  Thus, tracking the unmapped
> > address regions is just wasteful.  However, tracking every memory
> > mapping change might incur an overhead.  For the reason, DAMON applies
> > the dynamic memory mapping changes to the tracking regions only for each
> > of a user-specified time interval (``regions update interval``).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>
> Trivial inline. Otherwise makes sense to me.
> 
[...]
> > +static void damon_apply_three_regions(struct damon_ctx *ctx,
> > +		struct damon_task *t, struct region bregions[3])
> > +{
> > +	struct damon_region *r, *next;
> > +	unsigned int i = 0;
> > +
> > +	/* Remove regions which isn't in the three big regions now */
> > +	damon_for_each_region_safe(r, next, t) {
> > +		for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
> > +			if (damon_intersect(r, &bregions[i]))
> > +				break;
> > +		}
> > +		if (i == 3)
> > +			damon_destroy_region(r);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	/* Adjust intersecting regions to fit with the threee big regions */
> 
> three

Good eye!  Thanks for finding :)

[...]