On Thu 04-04-24 21:33:57, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 04.04.24 20:57, Christoph Lameter (Ampere) wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2024, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > > > Sounds like useful data, but is it a suitable topic for LSF-MM? > > > What open questions etc is it raising? > > > > > > mTHP is new functionality that will require additional work to support > > more use cases. It is also unclear at this point in what usecases mTHP is > > useful and where no benefit can so far be seen. Also the effect of > > coalescing multiple PTE entries into one TLB entry is new to MM > > (CONT_PTE). > > > > Ultimately it would be useful to have mTHP support also provide larger > > blocksize capabilities for filesystem etc etc. mTHP needs to mature and an > > analysis of the arguable a bit experimental state of affairs can help a > > lot in getting there. > > Right, something like that (open items, missed use cases, requirements, > ideas, etc,.) would be a better (good!) fit. > > Pure benchmark results, analysis and recommendations are great. But likely a > better fit for a (white) paper, blog post, less-discussion-focused > conference. Completely agreed! It would be really great if Yang Shi could open the topic with high level data and then we spent majority of the slot on the actual discussion. Thanks! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
