Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:06:46 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc:     Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Anchal Agarwal <anchalag@amazon.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: swap: properly update readahead statistics in
 unuse_pte_range()
Message-Id: <20200416210646.774bae8c321e3a44d6ffa8c3@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <871romvmrh.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
References: <20200416180132.GB3352@xps-13>
        <871romvmrh.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:01:22 +0800 "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> wrote:

> Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com> writes:
> 
> > In unuse_pte_range() we blindly swap-in pages without checking if the
> > swap entry is already present in the swap cache.
> >
> > By doing this, the hit/miss ratio used by the swap readahead heuristic
> > is not properly updated and this leads to non-optimal performance during
> > swapoff.
> 
> It's more important to describe why we need this patch in the patch
> description.  So, please add some information about your use case.  And
> please focus on the technical part instead of the business part.

Confused.  I thought the changelog was quite good.  If "business part"
means "end user effect of the patch" then that's a very important
thing.

> Thanks!  But you don't need to do this.  You can add my Reviewed-by after
> we have finished the work on patch description.

Can you be more specific about how you want this changed?