Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-66213-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240213-async-free-v3-1-b89c3cc48384@kernel.org>
 <c4ae18fb13ab1c63cdd34da9fe7b1e0f1a91c909.camel@linux.intel.com>
 <CAF8kJuMXjp1A1kdS_x-S_dyst8MLHwjuAEt-SfGERKVYZNmRww@mail.gmail.com> <f495b4844ffd9ad4340051edf8744d9d5584747b.camel@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <f495b4844ffd9ad4340051edf8744d9d5584747b.camel@linux.intel.com>
From: Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 17:03:48 -0800
Message-ID: <CAF8kJuM8609V48u6gz3tXiB67LofFghE1xEQU0q8t9o+sSiJdg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: swap: async free swap slot cache entries
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, 
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>, Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>, 
	Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, 
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>, Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>, 
	Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>, Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>, 
	Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 2:54=E2=80=AFPM Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.co=
m> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 10:56 -0800, Chris Li wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 4:08=E2=80=AFPM Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.inte=
l.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >  extern bool swap_slot_cache_enabled;
> > > > +extern uint8_t slot_cache_async_free __read_mostly;
> > >
> > > Why wouldn't you enable the async_free always?
> > > Otherwise the patch looks fine to me.
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback.
> >
> > Just in case someone doesn't care about this optimization and wants to
> > opt out this behavior?
> > Anyway, I am happy to update the patch without the sysfs control file a=
s well.
> >
>
> At least I couldn't see a downside to enable it always in the latest
> patch.  I think adding an extra sysfs is unnecessary.

Thanks, I just sent out V4 to remove the sysfs control file.

Chris