From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E2688D0040 for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 05:39:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFE6C3EE0C0 for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:39:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9215345DE50 for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:39:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766F245DE4E for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:39:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6696A1DB803B for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:39:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.133]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31E481DB802F for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:39:13 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Unmapped page cache control (v5) In-Reply-To: <20110401180455.GU2879@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20110401222250.A894.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110401180455.GU2879@balbir.in.ibm.com> Message-Id: <20110403183927.AE4D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:39:12 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, npiggin@kernel.dk, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cl@linux.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, Mel Gorman , Minchan Kim > > > > Hm. OK, I may misread. > > > > Can you please explain the reason why de-duplication feature need to selectable and > > > > disabled by defaut. "explicity enable" mean this feature want to spot corner case issue?? > > > > > > Yes, because given a selection of choices (including what you > > > mentioned in the review), it would be nice to have > > > this selectable. > > > > It's no good answer. :-/ > > I am afraid I cannot please you with my answers > > > Who need the feature and who shouldn't use it? It this enough valuable for enough large > > people? That's my question point. > > > > You can see the use cases documented, including when running Linux as > a guest under other hypervisors, Which hypervisor? If this patch is unrelated 99.9999% people, shouldn't you have to reduce negative impact? > today we have a choice of not using > host page cache with cache=none, but nothing the other way round. > There are other use cases for embedded folks (in terms of controlling > unmapped page cache), please see previous discussions. Is there other usecase? really? Where exist? Why do you start to talk about embedded sudenly? I reviewed this as virtualization feature beucase you wrote so in [path 0/3]. Why do you change your point suddenly? -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org