From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] thp, mm: locking tail page is a bug Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:43:53 -0700 Message-ID: <51E71E29.6030703@sr71.net> References: <1373885274-25249-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <1373885274-25249-6-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20130717140953.7560e88e607f8f5df1b1fdd8@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , Al Viro , Hugh Dickins , Wu Fengguang , Jan Kara , Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Hillf Danton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130717140953.7560e88e607f8f5df1b1fdd8@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 07/17/2013 02:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > lock_page() is a pretty commonly called function, and I assume quite a > lot of people run with CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=y. > > Is the overhead added by this patch really worthwhile? I always thought of it as a developer-only thing. I don't think any of the big distros turn it on by default. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757542Ab3GQWoE (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:44:04 -0400 Received: from www.sr71.net ([198.145.64.142]:53892 "EHLO blackbird.sr71.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756023Ab3GQWoD (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:44:03 -0400 Message-ID: <51E71E29.6030703@sr71.net> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:43:53 -0700 From: Dave Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , Al Viro , Hugh Dickins , Wu Fengguang , Jan Kara , Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Hillf Danton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] thp, mm: locking tail page is a bug References: <1373885274-25249-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <1373885274-25249-6-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20130717140953.7560e88e607f8f5df1b1fdd8@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20130717140953.7560e88e607f8f5df1b1fdd8@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/17/2013 02:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > lock_page() is a pretty commonly called function, and I assume quite a > lot of people run with CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=y. > > Is the overhead added by this patch really worthwhile? I always thought of it as a developer-only thing. I don't think any of the big distros turn it on by default.