linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Torvalds, Linus" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24)
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 03:45:09 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200710030345.10026.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071001142222.fcaa8d57.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

On Tuesday 02 October 2007 07:22, Andrew Morton wrote:

> remove-zero_page.patch
>
>   Linus dislikes it.  Probably drop it.

I don't know if Linus actually disliked the patch itself, or disliked
my (maybe confusingly worded) rationale?

To clarify: it is not zero_page that fundamentally causes a problem,
but it is a problem that was exposed when I rationalised the page
refcounting in the kernel (and mapcounting in the mm).

I see about 4 things we can do:
1. Nothing
2. Remove zero_page
3. Reintroduce some refcount special-casing for the zero page
4. zero_page per-node or per-cpu or whatever

1 and 2 kind of imply that nothing much sane should use the zero_page
much (the former also implies that we don't care much about those who
do, but in that case, why not go for code removal?).

3 and 4 are if we think there are valid heavy users of zero page, or we
are worried about hurting badly written apps by removing it. If the former,
I'd love to hear about them; if the latter, then it definitely is a valid
concern and I have a patch to avoid refcounting (but if this is the case
then I do hope that one day we can eventually remove it).


> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page.patch
> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page-fix.patch
> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page-fix-2.patch
> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page-fix-function-declaration.patch
> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page-fix-bug-at-include-linux-mmh220.p
>atch
> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page-kill-redundancy-in-rotate_reclaim
>able_page.patch
> mm-use-pagevec-to-rotate-reclaimable-page-move_tail_pages-into-lru_add_drai
>n.patch
>
>   I guess I'll merge this.  Would be nice to have wider perfromance testing
>   but I guess it'll be easy enough to undo.

Care to give it one more round through -mm? Is it easy enough to
keep? I haven't had a chance to review it, which I'd like to do at some
point (and I don't think it would hurt to have a bit more testing).

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-10-02 17:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20071001142222.fcaa8d57.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2007-10-02  4:21 ` Memory controller merge " Balbir Singh
2007-10-02 15:46   ` Hugh Dickins
2007-10-03  8:13     ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-03 18:47       ` Hugh Dickins
2007-10-04  4:16         ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-04 13:16           ` Hugh Dickins
2007-10-05  3:07             ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-07 17:41               ` Hugh Dickins
2007-10-08  2:54                 ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-04 16:10     ` Paul Menage
2007-10-10 21:07   ` Rik van Riel
2007-10-11  6:33     ` Balbir Singh
2007-10-02 16:06 ` kswapd min order, slub max order [was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24] Hugh Dickins
2007-10-02  9:10   ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-02 18:38   ` Mel Gorman
2007-10-02 18:28     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-03  0:37       ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-02 16:21 ` new aops merge " Hugh Dickins
2007-10-02 17:45 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2007-10-03 10:58   ` remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24) Andrew Morton
2007-10-03 15:21   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-08 15:17     ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-09 13:00       ` Hugh Dickins
2007-10-09 14:52       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-09  9:31         ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-10  2:22           ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-09 10:15             ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-10  3:06               ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-10  4:06               ` Hugh Dickins
2007-10-10  5:20                 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-09 14:30                   ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-10 15:04                     ` Linus Torvalds

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200710030345.10026.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox