On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 2:06 AM Bodeddula, Balasubramaniam <bodeddub@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Tested-by: bodeddub@xxxxxxxxxx Very thanks for your test. > > > > We are interested in this patch and have tested an earlier version of this patch on 5.11-rc4 kernel version. I did a functional validation of the changes and saw that the total memory listed by free command increasing and more memory was made available when memory was allocated in hugepages. 1G hugepages gave higher improvements compared to 2M, as expected. Is there a formal way to publish the results? I can do the same as required (I am new to Linux Kernel patching process). I don’t know if there is a formal way. But maybe you can share the test result directly through this thread. If someone knows this, please let me know. Thanks. > > > > I have a few follow-up questions on this patch: > > 1. What is the overall status of this patch? What is the ballpark timeline we are looking for this patch to be accepted. There is only one patch of this patchset that has no reviewed-by tag. I think it might be 5.13 in the best case But I don't have the right to decide. > > 2. Why is this patch not working when memory is allocated as hugepages by THP (transparent hugepages). THP uses AnonHugePages, doesn’t this patch generalize for all ‘type’ of hugepages? Now it only supports HugeTLB pages. THP is a little different and complex compared to HugeTLB. I need to investigate THP in depth to determine the possible problems. > > > > Please let me know if there are any additional tasks that I can help. Happy to help. > > > > Thanks.
