From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f200.google.com (mail-wr0-f200.google.com [209.85.128.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E12D800D8 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:11:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr0-f200.google.com with SMTP id q2so2192537wrg.5 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:11:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 186si17266wmr.17.2018.01.24.03.11.34 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:11:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 12:11:30 +0100 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: make faultaround produce old ptes Message-ID: <20180124111130.GB28465@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1516599614-18546-1-git-send-email-vinmenon@codeaurora.org> <20180123145506.GN1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180123160509.GT1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> <218a11e6-766c-d8f6-a266-cbd0852de1c8@codeaurora.org> <20180124093839.GJ1526@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vinayak Menon Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, minchan@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, ying.huang@intel.com, riel@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, mgorman@suse.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz On Wed 24-01-18 16:13:06, Vinayak Menon wrote: > On 1/24/2018 3:08 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Try to be more realistic. We have way too many sysctls. Some of them are > > really implementation specific and then it is not really trivial to get > > rid of them because people tend to (think they) depend on them. This is > > a user interface like any others and we do not add them without a due > > scrutiny. Moreover we do have an interface to suppress the effect of the > > faultaround. Instead you are trying to add another tunable for something > > that we can live without altogether. See my point? > > I agree on the sysctl part. But why should we disable faultaround and > not find a way to make it useful ? I didn't say that. Please read what I've written. I really hate your new sysctl, because that is not a solution. If you can find a different one than disabling it then go ahead. But do not try to put burden to users because they know what to set. Because they won't. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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: email@kvack.org