From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from va-1-115.ptr.blmpb.com (va-1-115.ptr.blmpb.com [209.127.230.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A03F13B895B for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2026 06:19:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.127.230.115 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785219557; cv=none; b=IpB+SE6VlngjG4G3d27aQ0wmB/elmJuozDmmvq6bCfET3Qgu/YyJ1ttENGrOZzBBUVN0FDc1N5BKNKtyML2oLX4Z9R4NyZJz2ISRGYWFFpskANrZWLdV1d23kZf/79Ji5rjtE0iWWok9Rl2Dka+JR/wZczOiVVjLQAO+iw2hMJY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785219557; c=relaxed/simple; bh=caf89WdQlAn88Zw6W4rdTABsOclOO1+8aovrt0TU80k=; h=Message-Id:In-Reply-To:Subject:Mime-Version:Cc:From:References: Content-Type:To:Date; b=Dj0U6eMAVAffdJglaO7cT1akCWu1tMf6KPEkIoyGxFl7r00vKiEYEm1MpfMKweTv+0H275XiJt7Rn53KczQRwB/P3K3eWUhkBj7fcK1bPWr6/Cx2KX/sAccOo9uBiEFqxkiHcyehSArF8LC5SdYOpAvKPwlwxqVwnZUgYexzRBQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=bytedance.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bytedance.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bytedance.com header.i=@bytedance.com header.b=lGjcRvGe; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.127.230.115 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=bytedance.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bytedance.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bytedance.com header.i=@bytedance.com header.b="lGjcRvGe" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2212171451; d=bytedance.com; t=1785219548; h=from:subject: mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:reply-to:content-type: mime-version:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=uMSlAg4H80uRnLlzygyMggmh5xo1htbT7Gs4J7Mu4X0=; b=lGjcRvGeA4xjfWVtvy04vgeocGnG/m+Sng3Tr5trR4aV+URFh9SFcJc7/cJZGPWdXqs2S4 1HTUiqPAyGB7YrdXylVieFBCk4V6mQsdgSi3Qp7dHAaMuD6+CXz53JsNBGjtBCbzEMHMNk 8yV+YFtH+eHn8kkGM2qeoYOBxrDjvJbnAQZHa+uTVmUm8O59yPdXPsA+lcQbuTzITyNrWW dmOzgZTCHAWCLWM7AJzFYBMZT1lkeQSNRqdWJg2C3Ncb2audeaDBaZui4G28eZLb5wBAVg y1JnzgPS7JHEEy5Oan992vh2VxYRRLT+corWIERzo0PGBw9r2dNnkM2kyckKMg== Message-Id: <4d71dc0f-dce0-4d69-80ca-bdd8047eb9da@bytedance.com> In-Reply-To: <20260727135725.694139f5ecad67752b0985d0@linux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/9] mm: optimize zone-device memmap initialization Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Original-From: Li Zhe X-Lms-Return-Path: User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cc: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , From: "Li Zhe" References: <20260727123429.5673-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com> <20260727135725.694139f5ecad67752b0985d0@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 To: "Andrew Morton" Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 14:18:44 +0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 7/28/26 4:57 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:34:20 +0800 "Li Zhe" wrote: > >> memmap_init_zone_device() can take a noticeable amount of time when large >> pmem namespaces are bound or rebound, because it initializes nearly >> identical struct page descriptors one PFN at a time. This series reduces >> that ZONE_DEVICE memmap initialization overhead by reusing prepared >> struct page templates and, on x86, using memcpy_nontemporal() for the >> template copy path. > Thanks. > > Human review started out strong but petered out later in the series. > This often happens. I'd prefer to wait until it fills out further. > > AI review had things to say, as it often does: > https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260727123429.5673-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com Thanks for the review. These comments seem to mostly cover the same memcpy_nontemporal(), MOVNTI alignment, helper-level drain, and sanitizer/tracepoint tradeoff topics that were discussed for v7. The v8 changes keep the x86 non-temporal copy path unchanged, except for making the generic memcpy_nontemporal() fallback a void function-like macro. The remaining updates are clarifications in the cover letter and commit messages. So I do not plan further code changes for these comments at this point, unless someone points out a problem in the previous discussion. For the previous discussion, please see: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260722081800.90085-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com/ Thanks, Zhe