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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75133C4167B for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2023 07:16:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1377698AbjLAHPz (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2023 02:15:55 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38262 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1377715AbjLAHPv (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2023 02:15:51 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EF7B172B for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 23:15:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-7ad501cb1f9so54406839f.0 for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 23:15:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1701414956; x=1702019756; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HB8/JLE5Q+CEbaRXphWzwNtE755/m5oShsWpn9WkzhE=; b=NWhYcC+rySdW4BbgYF+hXJ+x2HbVgvEH4U/PPpimXUdnVrGxfxH2HIyFy7mOJHCJfd +iKfzrrzlUV6Zvb3hMTENG8trI1d+jPR5CAxE9Lj6jRsIbAk6gjhLqBpsH0A0yEIA+IR OsldK3VvDEKT33LqLy5cQoumlLiNxqPptf/XgPPFJwoz4c297h0UedWzHdBHP98H7L16 zNUIt+0anLxS891nX/ylcC+UYEeE2hnlqBhT9jrJepaQjKka7m6ITGvv3F/7xhi/G41Y iHPt2KsfNcc6TduUkzjqz2EU5zQk6+cV3gkUyGKbbGxniybOvZljdSrErDNW4ERLvm0t cxLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701414956; x=1702019756; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=HB8/JLE5Q+CEbaRXphWzwNtE755/m5oShsWpn9WkzhE=; b=cwKNisbHeXdahvosupmtrumemwHefz8jne5RZs6ZJrkvZgDWlw4CKsQsSELY+zzEj3 j9jIcR3s+0UFha4QS9f7DMExBZgXZPgqdxE9mqtj8cZs+Spr5x09nhEIyPVjB9dSddEK MJgR+ZtLwSyezlmbPpt7I/sVyXvCAhfSsdUsNm+4guJ8vyrB9I1A9+mPTaxiTvUtErcT xgzPfFegPajnbBKtTt1ckss5gsYBGcXRKezAnW1Wz8DaT+mKwZ7Q/N5QDI1BWNdo+SfX V9X1hIoPLUQswy9QvggqoZCxBqcGg6gt7Vw0YhNRJgNhWjgdKV5B4ton6g8yJ33mWUR9 H+Gg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxspDH0Y+iJqU2MULoQLGEf5RvrOoTi5PSZWlwX1pi57wwhbZf5 TBc9hK/kUSQpmiVeYHqNTgpBYw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFTewBEQyQQDcb7KJjg7GuDtl2CVJ9HNBJiRFFLouQbJ73tVl4kWVnTrYS01WUQcmrbbaatcQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:156c:b0:35c:b8d7:937d with SMTP id k12-20020a056e02156c00b0035cb8d7937dmr21704723ilu.9.1701414955732; Thu, 30 Nov 2023 23:15:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (170.102.105.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.105.102.170]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j64-20020a638b43000000b0059d6f5196fasm2401871pge.78.2023.11.30.23.15.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 30 Nov 2023 23:15:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 07:15:51 +0000 From: Carlos Llamas To: Alice Ryhl Cc: Arve =?iso-8859-1?B?SGr4bm5lduVn?= , Christian Brauner , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Joel Fernandes , kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Martijn Coenen , Suren Baghdasaryan , Todd Kjos Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/21] binder: do not add pages to LRU in release path Message-ID: References: <20231102185934.773885-15-cmllamas@google.com> <20231107090829.259753-1-aliceryhl@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231107090829.259753-1-aliceryhl@google.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 09:08:29AM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote: > Carlos Llamas writes: > > In binder_alloc_deferred_release() pages are added to the LRU list via > > binder_free_buf_locked(). However, this is pointless because these pages > > are kfree'd immediately afterwards. Add an option to skip the LRU list. > > They aren't freed with kfree, buf with __free_page. > > > Signed-off-by: Carlos Llamas > > The change itself looks correct, so I'll give my tag for this: > > Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl > > But I'm wondering whether process cleanup really is so performance > intensive to justify the added complexity of this? So, this was needed on an earlier version of the patchset and I was hoping that it would also help with an issue reported here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZSHmtLqtNZRAtaZ0@google.com/ However, I do agree that it is unecessary at this stage so I've decided to drop it from v2. Thanks, -- Carlos Llamas