On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:37:31 +0100 Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue 17-01-17 15:45:39, Andrew Morton wrote: > [...] > > From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: mm-swap-add-cluster-lock-v5 > > I assume you are going to fold this into the original patch. Do you > think it would make sense to have it in a separate patch along with > the reasoning provided via email? It should be OK - the v5 changelog (which I shall use for the folded patch, as usual) has : Compared with a previous implementation using bit_spin_lock, the : sequential swap out throughput improved about 3.2%. Test was done on a : Xeon E5 v3 system. The swap device used is a RAM simulated PMEM : (persistent memory) device. To test the sequential swapping out, the test : case created 32 processes, which sequentially allocate and write to the : anonymous pages until the RAM and part of the swap device is used. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>