Re: [RFC 0/3] mm: Discard lazily freed pages when migrating

["Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>]

Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> writes:

> On Tue 03-03-20 09:30:28, Huang, Ying wrote:
> [...]
>> Yes.  mmap() can control whether to populate the underlying physical
>> pages.
>
> right because many usecases benefit from it. They simply know that the
> mapping will be used completely and it is worth saving overhead for #PF.
> See. there is a clear justification for that policy.
>
>> But for migrating MADV_FREE pages, there's no control, all pages
>> will be populated again always by default.  Maybe we should avoid to do
>> that in some situations too.
>
> Now let's have a look here. It is the userspace that decided to mark
> MADV_FREE pages. It is under its full control which pages are to be
> freed lazily. If the userspace wants to move those pages then it is
> likely aware they have been MADV_FREE, right? If the userspace wanted to
> save migration overhead then it could either chose to not migrate those
> pages or simply unmap them right away. So in the end we are talking
> about saving munmap/MAMDV_DONTNEED or potentially more move_pages calls
> to skip over MADV_FREE holes. Which is all nice but is there any
> userspace that really does care? Because this is a fundamental question
> here and it doesn't make much sense to discuss this left to right unless
> this is clear.

Although I don't agree with you, I don't want to continue.  Because I
feel that the discussion may be too general to go anywhere.  I admit
that I go to the general side firstly, sorry about that.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying