On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:29:41 -0800 Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 2:01 AM SeongJae Park <sjpark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Even somehow the initial monitoring target regions are well constructed > > to fulfill the assumption (pages in same region have similar access > > frequencies), the data access pattern can be dynamically changed. This > > will result in low monitoring quality. To keep the assumption as much > > as possible, DAMON adaptively merges and splits each region based on > > their access frequency. > > > > For each ``aggregation interval``, it compares the access frequencies of > > adjacent regions and merges those if the frequency difference is small. > > Then, after it reports and clears the aggregated access frequency of > > each region, it splits each region into two or three regions if the > > total number of regions will not exceed the user-specified maximum > > number of regions after the split. > > > > In this way, DAMON provides its best-effort quality and minimal overhead > > while keeping the upper-bound overhead that users set. > > > > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sjpark@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Leonard Foerster <foersleo@xxxxxxxxx> > > The high level comment I have is that kdamond_[merge|split]_regions > should be part of the abstraction of the target instead of the damon > context. Agreed in a high level. Please refer to my answer to your second suggestion at https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20201126115157.6888-1-sjpark@xxxxxxxxxx/ Thanks, SeongJae Park
