From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f198.google.com (mail-pf0-f198.google.com [209.85.192.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E70C6B0069 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:38:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pf0-f198.google.com with SMTP id y143so262425941pfb.6 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:38:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg0-x242.google.com (mail-pg0-x242.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400e:c05::242]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z32si397100plh.321.2017.01.24.21.38.35 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:38:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg0-x242.google.com with SMTP id 194so18647099pgd.0 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:38:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:38:49 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: extend zero pages to same element pages for zram Message-ID: <20170125053849.GF2234@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> References: <20170123040347.GA2327@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> <20170123062716.GF24581@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> <20170123071339.GD2327@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> <20170123074054.GA12782@bbox> <1ac33960-b523-1c58-b2de-8f6ddb3a5219@huawei.com> <20170125012905.GA17937@bbox> <20170125013244.GB2234@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> <20170125024835.GA24387@bombadil.infradead.org> <20170125041857.GC2234@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> <20170125045137.GA18289@bbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170125045137.GA18289@bbox> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Minchan Kim Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Matthew Wilcox , zhouxianrong , Joonsoo Kim , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, ngupta@vflare.org, Mi.Sophia.Wang@huawei.com, zhouxiyu@huawei.com, weidu.du@huawei.com, zhangshiming5@huawei.com, won.ho.park@huawei.com On (01/25/17 13:51), Minchan Kim wrote: [..] > > Minchan, zhouxianrong, I was completely wrong. we can't > > do memset(). d'oh, I did not know it truncates 4 bytes to > > one byte only (doesn't make too much sense to me). > > Now, I read Matthew's comment and understood. Thanks. > It means zhouxianrong's patch I sent recently is okay? this one looks OK to me https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1316290.html I'd agree with Joonsoo that doing forward prefetching is _probably_ better than backwards prefetching. not that it necessarily should confuse the CPU (need to google if ARM handles it normally), but still. -ss -- 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