On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 12:21:32 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 2:18 PM Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 3:33 AM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On 11/8/21 12:16 AM, Muchun Song wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 11:22 AM Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> This series can minimize the overhead of struct page for 2MB HugeTLB pages > > > >> significantly. It further reduces the overhead of struct page by 12.5% for > > > >> a 2MB HugeTLB compared to the previous approach, which means 2GB per 1TB > > > >> HugeTLB. It is a nice gain. Comments and reviews are welcome. Thanks. > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Ping guys. Does anyone have any comments or suggestions > > > > on this series? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > I did look over the series earlier. I have no issue with the hugetlb and > > > vmemmap modifications as they are enhancements to the existing > > > optimizations. My primary concern is the (small) increased overhead > > > for the helpers as outlined in your cover letter. Since these helpers > > > are not limited to hugetlb and used throughout the kernel, I would > > > really like to get comments from others with a better understanding of > > > the potential impact. > > > > Thanks Mike. I'd like to hear others' comments about this as well. > > From my point of view, maybe the (small) overhead is acceptable > > since it only affects the head page, however Matthew Wilcox's folio > > series could reduce this situation as well. I think Mike was inviting you to run some tests to quantify the overhead ;) > Ping guys. > > Hi Andrew, > > Do you have any suggestions on this series to move it on? > I tossed it in there for some testing but yes please, additional reviewing?
