On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 7:41 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. I will try my best to minimize the time spent by explaining benchmark data. It may take 10 - 15 minutes in ballpark estimation. Then the remaining time can be spent in actual discussion. > > Thanks! > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs
