On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 09:10:34AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 12/21/2014 02:28 PM, Rafael Aquini wrote: > >>> > > I'm fine either way, it makes the change even simpler. Also, if we > >>> > > decide to get rid of page_size != PAGE_SIZE condition I believe we can > >>> > > also get rid of that "huge" hint being conditionally printed out too. > >> > > >> > That would break existing users of the "huge" flag. That makes it out > >> > of the question, right? > >> > > > Yeah, but it sort of follows the same complaint Johannes did for the > > conditional page size printouts. If we start to print out page size > > deliberately for each map regardless their backing pages being PAGE_SIZE > > long or bigger, I don't see much point on keep conditionally printing out > > the 'huge' hint out. > > Because existing userspace might be relying on it. If we take the > 'huge' hint out, userspace will break. > > > As I said before, I'm fine either way though I think > > we can keep the current behaviour, and just disambiguate page sizes != > > PAGE_SIZE as in the current proposal. > > Unless we somehow have a (really good) handle on how many apps out there > are reading and using 'huge', I think we have to keep the existing behavior. > Right. I definitely don't have anything better than what I already presented which seems beaten by your argument, already. Remaining question here is: should we print out 'pagesize' deliberately or conditionally, only to disambiguate cases where page_size != PAGE_SIZE? Have a very nice holidays folks! -- Rafael -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>