On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 9:20 AM David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 23.11.21 18:17, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 8:57 AM David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > [...] > >>>> > >>>> I do wonder which these locking contexts are exactly, and if we could > >>>> also do the same thing on ordinary munmap -- because I assume it can be > >>>> similarly problematic for some applications. > >>> > >>> This is a good question regarding munmap. One main difference is > >>> munmap takes mmap_lock in write mode and usually performance critical > >>> applications avoid such operations. > >> > >> Maybe we can extend it too most page zapping, if that makes things simpler. > >> > > > > Do you mean doing sync THP split for most of page zapping functions > > (but only if that makes things simpler)? > > > > Yes -- if there are no downsides. > I will try. At the moment the assumption of "Not null zap_details implies leave swap entries" is giving me a headache. Thanks for the suggestions and your time.
