From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752583AbdI1BCY (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:02:24 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:20848 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752520AbdI1BCX (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:02:23 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,447,1500966000"; d="scan'208";a="904579572" From: "Huang\, Ying" To: Michal Hocko Cc: Minchan Kim , "Huang\, Ying" , Andrew Morton , , , Johannes Weiner , "Rik van Riel" , Shaohua Li , Hugh Dickins , Fengguang Wu , Tim Chen , Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, swap: Make VMA based swap readahead configurable References: <20170926132129.dbtr2mof35x4j4og@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170927050401.GA715@bbox> <20170927074835.37m4dclmew5ecli2@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170927080432.GA1160@bbox> <20170927083512.dydqlqezh5polggb@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170927131511.GA338@bgram> <20170927132241.tshup6kcwe5pcxek@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170927134117.GB338@bgram> <20170927135034.yatxlhvunawzmcar@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170927141008.GA1278@bgram> <20170927141723.bixcum3fler7q4w5@dhcp22.suse.cz> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 09:02:20 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20170927141723.bixcum3fler7q4w5@dhcp22.suse.cz> (Michal Hocko's message of "Wed, 27 Sep 2017 16:17:23 +0200") Message-ID: <87mv5f8wkj.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Michal, Michal Hocko writes: > On Wed 27-09-17 23:10:08, Minchan Kim wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 03:50:34PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > On Wed 27-09-17 22:41:17, Minchan Kim wrote: >> > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 03:22:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > [...] >> > > > simply cannot disable swap readahead when page-cluster is 0? >> > > >> > > That's was what I want really but Huang want to use two readahead >> > > algorithms in parallel so he wanted to keep two separated disable >> > > knobs. >> > >> > If it breaks existing and documented behavior then it is a clear >> > regression and it should be fixed. I do not see why this should be >> > disputable at all. >> >> Indeed but Huang doesn't think so. He has thought it's not a regression. >> Frankly speaking, I'm really bored of discussing with it. >> https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=150526413319763&w=2 > > Then send a patch explaining why you consider this a regression with > some numbers backing it and I will happily ack it. I still think there may be a performance regression for some users because of the change of the algorithm and the knobs, and the performance regression can be resolved via setting the new knob. But I don't think there will be a functionality regression. Do you agree? Best Regards, Huang, Ying >> So I passed the decision to Andrew. >> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/<20170913014019.GB29422@bbox> >> >> The config option idea is compromise approach although I don't like it >> and still believe it's simple clear *regression* so 0 page-cluster >> should keep the swap readahead disabled. > > It is not a compromise. The regression is still there for many users > potentially (just consider zram distribution kernel users...).