From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F03FACCFA13 for ; Fri, 1 May 2026 17:09:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=aCKpiD8Crlk0uEQZs9vyjBCgLqxVn32/cxl6Y0AtRGE=; b=SFaTq9UqNgGHOZElWDfT1tRRCi XvvxmQ9sS8Bra4cN3lgfc+NRuAZe3raZe27qNEJ8w3870xDqNg4TO3a9UNPBnCTVP47D3BPOOJNqd SU/7eAWCtQXK5izPifrWM0DGyhk4ut5NlUKyxH5NUTeHvStMnwa1hgMmysfW+va5bOuOrLxtvjJRg Lc86avx031EcwN17lla2poqYNOZwir6W6t7Sqn0A9jvAFglGYXdKl6kT0quGgGM9RySQBeWn3r6rd 3W1J/FBNSJX8glpn6wrWpcB7aR3SndJcnH0N/ggR9yZg9YBxHofbVQ4Py5v1fQNt5s4+NPBWgL8aj VTYqZl9w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wIrN2-00000007USQ-0H2O; Fri, 01 May 2026 17:09:44 +0000 Received: from sea.source.kernel.org ([172.234.252.31]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wIrMz-00000007US0-13Xb; Fri, 01 May 2026 17:09:42 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sea.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7D143E9A; Fri, 1 May 2026 17:09:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7EC2AC2BCB4; Fri, 1 May 2026 17:09:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1777655379; bh=aCKpiD8Crlk0uEQZs9vyjBCgLqxVn32/cxl6Y0AtRGE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OX2L1x4xFIxbScfPDUbir6mmS+xdX9NmUYzJR0EJkE7ri86qbaeUTkDb4jWI5oeb+ aN4JbRR+N5UIrCNNa22w2pCZ2JSMSHoSZwNy2T2qFiVEenmDxH9tkupv+ZDyGU2ObI 654hr8gYpcXDtcmeRIPh1KdMIPoWk95vpdUy3GSPXi4IHKF8A7wxn55TDFMfm9T3X7 2RVfuwK5n/jkaekIr44u2S02mSaPb7gcycVdlcOtlmx86ngcN1rcmImzOHzRA44jyl l2G+a79TnBeaUy0DKnFo0u2dmfaqSvsLz/R2tzsXHpnuJk6XOz3vggn1h43+SNrKA+ 0+Ne8WhoVmpcw== Date: Fri, 1 May 2026 18:09:30 +0100 From: Lorenzo Stoakes To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: "Barry Song (Xiaomi)" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, david@kernel.org, liam@infradead.org, vbabka@kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, jack@suse.cz, pfalcato@suse.de, wanglian@kylinos.cn, chentao@kylinos.cn, lianux.mm@gmail.com, kunwu.chan@gmail.com, liyangouwen1@oppo.com, chrisl@kernel.org, kasong@tencent.com, shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, nphamcs@gmail.com, bhe@redhat.com, youngjun.park@lge.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: reduce mmap_lock contention and improve page fault performance Message-ID: References: <20260430040427.4672-1-baohua@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260501_100941_310975_D854A137 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.36 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 05:06:02PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 04:52:12PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > After a brief eyeball I share Matthew's assessment, I really don't like this > > series, it's piling on complexity for what seem like niche cases. > > I don't think they're niche cases ... I think it's a real problem. > While our current code performs better for this workload than the > pre-vma-lock code did, it doesn't perform as well as it could. > > > We already have enough weirdness in fault code honestly. > > > > Let's maybe discuss at LSF if you're attending? > > Not only is he attending, there's a topic scheduled (currently 10:30 on > Wednesday). Well then, let's revisit this in person in Zagreb :) Cheers, Lorenzo