All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>, WANG Chao <chaowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, vmacache: Add kconfig VMACACHE_SHIFT
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:22:39 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54C123CF.2070107@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1421943573.4903.24.camel@stgolabs.net>

On 01/22/2015 11:19 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 15:57 +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>> Hi, Davidlohr
>>
>> On 01/21/15 at 11:46pm, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:29 +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>>>> Add a new kconfig option VMACACHE_SHIFT (as a power of 2) to specify the
>>>> number of slots vma cache has for each thread. Range is chosen 0-4 (1-16
>>>> slots) to consider both overhead and performance penalty. Default is 2
>>>> (4 slots) as it originally is, which provides good enough balance.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nack. I don't feel comfortable making scalability features of core code
>>> configurable.
>>
>> Out of respect, is this a general rule not making scalability features
>> of core code configurable?
> 
> I doubt its a rule, just common sense. Users have no business
> configuring such low level details. The optimizations need to
> transparently work for everyone.

There may sometimes be a good reason for making this kind of
thing configurable, but since there were no performance
numbers in the changelog, I have not seen any such reason for
this particular change :)

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>, WANG Chao <chaowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, vmacache: Add kconfig VMACACHE_SHIFT
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:22:39 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54C123CF.2070107@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1421943573.4903.24.camel@stgolabs.net>

On 01/22/2015 11:19 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 15:57 +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>> Hi, Davidlohr
>>
>> On 01/21/15 at 11:46pm, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2015-01-22 at 14:29 +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>>>> Add a new kconfig option VMACACHE_SHIFT (as a power of 2) to specify the
>>>> number of slots vma cache has for each thread. Range is chosen 0-4 (1-16
>>>> slots) to consider both overhead and performance penalty. Default is 2
>>>> (4 slots) as it originally is, which provides good enough balance.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nack. I don't feel comfortable making scalability features of core code
>>> configurable.
>>
>> Out of respect, is this a general rule not making scalability features
>> of core code configurable?
> 
> I doubt its a rule, just common sense. Users have no business
> configuring such low level details. The optimizations need to
> transparently work for everyone.

There may sometimes be a good reason for making this kind of
thing configurable, but since there were no performance
numbers in the changelog, I have not seen any such reason for
this particular change :)

  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-22 16:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-22  6:29 [PATCH] mm, vmacache: Add kconfig VMACACHE_SHIFT WANG Chao
2015-01-22  6:29 ` WANG Chao
2015-01-22  7:46 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-22  7:46   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-22  7:57   ` WANG Chao
2015-01-22  7:57     ` WANG Chao
2015-01-22 16:19     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-22 16:19       ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-22 16:22       ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-01-22 16:22         ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-23  5:14         ` WANG Chao
2015-01-23  5:14           ` WANG Chao
2015-01-24  1:02           ` Sasha Levin
2015-01-24  1:02             ` Sasha Levin
2015-01-22 15:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-01-22 15:45   ` Vlastimil Babka

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=54C123CF.2070107@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chaowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=walken@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.