Re:

SeongJae Park
2021-08-13T08:15:01Z

From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>

On Thu, 12 Aug 2021 13:19:21 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Aug 2021 09:42:40 +0000 SeongJae Park <sj38.park@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > +config PAGE_IDLE_FLAG
> > > + bool "Add PG_idle and PG_young flags"
> > > + help
> > > + This feature adds PG_idle and PG_young flags in 'struct page'. PTE
> > > + Accessed bit writers can set the state of the bit in the flags to let
> > > + other PTE Accessed bit readers don't disturbed.
> > >
> > > This needs to be converted to proper, or at least comprehensible, English....
> >
> > Thank you for the comment.
> >
> > How about below?
> >
> > --- a/mm/Kconfig
> > +++ b/mm/Kconfig
> > @@ -743,9 +743,9 @@ config PAGE_IDLE_FLAG
> > bool "Add PG_idle and PG_young flags"
> > select PAGE_EXTENSION if !64BIT
> > help
> > - This feature adds PG_idle and PG_young flags in 'struct page'. PTE
> > - Accessed bit writers can set the state of the bit in the flags to let
> > - other PTE Accessed bit readers don't disturbed.
> > + This feature adds 'PG_idle' and 'PG_young' flags in 'struct page'.
> > + PTE Accessed bit writers can save the state of the bit in the flags
> > + to let other PTE Accessed bit readers don't get disturbed.
>
> How about this?
>
> --- a/mm/Kconfig~mm-idle_page_tracking-make-pg_idle-reusable-fix-fix
> +++ a/mm/Kconfig
> @@ -743,9 +743,9 @@ config PAGE_IDLE_FLAG
> bool "Add PG_idle and PG_young flags"
> select PAGE_EXTENSION if !64BIT
> help
> - This feature adds PG_idle and PG_young flags in 'struct page'. PTE
> - Accessed bit writers can set the state of the bit in the flags to let
> - other PTE Accessed bit readers don't disturbed.
> + This adds PG_idle and PG_young flags to 'struct page'. PTE Accessed
> + bit writers can set the state of the bit in the flags so that PTE
> + Accessed bit readers may avoid disturbance.
>
> config IDLE_PAGE_TRACKING
> bool "Enable idle page tracking"

So good, thank you!

>
> Also, is there any way in which we can avoid presenting this option to
> the user? Because most users will have real trouble understanding what
> this thing is for. Can we simply select it when needed, as dictated by
> other, higher-level config options?

I believe this is the right way to go! I sent a patch for removing the prompt
of this option:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210813081238.34705-1-sj38.park@gmail.com/

Thanks,
SeongJae Park