From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>,
Oleksiy.Avramchenko@sony.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] z3fold: use per-cpu unbuddied lists
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 16:07:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170802160716.f5d1072873799a3a420f6538@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170802122505.e41d5c778a873375bcb0cc19@gmail.com>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 12:25:05 +0200 Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com> wrote:
> z3fold is operating on unbuddied lists in a simple manner: in fact,
> it only takes the first entry off the list on a hot path. So if the
> z3fold pool is big enough and balanced well enough, considering
> only the lists local to the current CPU won't be an issue in any
> way, while random I/O performance will go up.
Has the performance benefit been measured? It's a large patch.
> This patch also introduces two worker threads which: one for async
> in-page object layout optimization and one for releasing freed
> pages.
Why? What are the runtime effects of this change? Does this turn
currently-synchronous operations into now-async operations? If so,
what are the implications of this if, say, the workqueue doesn't get
serviced for a while?
etc. Sorry, but I'm not seeing anywhere near enough information and
testing results to justify merging such a large and intrusive patch.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-02 23:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-02 10:25 Vitaly Wool
2017-08-02 13:50 ` kbuild test robot
2017-08-02 23:07 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2017-08-02 23:49 ` Vitaly Wool
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=20170802160716.f5d1072873799a3a420f6538@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Oleksiy.Avramchenko@sony.com \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=vitalywool@gmail.com \
/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