From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 393F1C433EF for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 08:16:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id AC3F36B0074; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 03:16:34 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A74CF6B0075; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 03:16:34 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9632A6B0078; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 03:16:34 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0217.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.217]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8658A6B0074 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 03:16:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin22.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4631F8249980 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 08:16:34 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79115277108.22.AAB2F9A Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [145.40.73.55]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C287A0002 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 08:16:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F726CE0EE1; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 08:16:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15B42C004E1; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 08:16:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1644221787; bh=Kdxt9TG6w4mznLHfPVGseD6vMZkNjtF5T6/d0pfwnqw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=oR/CVOljIOBGcSA1HZSzszU3jy5etyzW/C2sR8e6qItzw0s1DGNsrFmgDsY8Dq6AW SXvRTPOvoes2IKsG1ZFNYXApkr+k19WDWTz7qamlRjHETmS+GvqIrWW4K9+aZTB0U1 uu0oFDRmnPUcuot6Rzl99A8xPKWOLojPxWaJlOgOz0LLndc7kvF/Ln1upevFaRB0K2 dv2Ro/VK1Dok48c9CYaPtHuDOpUPQDqFwMDGcJ43JB9ax4wptBT402FqMXS+ZDrwpp rOskMr/ipInl9t3nGDmvgQUQ2fIUOj1vPKw47jUASAhUAaiUfgxGQ4045aN7lsjDQk sbfPa2tBO607g== From: SeongJae Park To: Pedro Gomes Cc: SeongJae Park , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/damon: Add option to monitor only writes Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 08:16:25 +0000 Message-Id: <20220207081625.3579-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 9C287A0002 X-Stat-Signature: 3sihm963um7fitugp9ewm8f8f474s1uf Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b="oR/CVOlj"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of sj@kernel.org designates 145.40.73.55 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sj@kernel.org X-Rspam-User: nil X-HE-Tag: 1644221793-93328 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 12:11:44 -0300 Pedro Gomes wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 10:39 AM SeongJae Park wrote: > > > I think this would be better to be implemented as another monitoring primitive > > based on the virtual address space monitoring primitives, e.g., vaddr-writes? > > Then the implementation would be simpler and changes to other files will be > > minimized. For the user space interface, we could use a prefix to target_ids > > debugfs file. For example, > > > > # echo "vaddr-writes $(pidof workload)" > $debugfs/damon/target_ids > > I will do that. Thanks! > > > > This patch also adds the actions mergeable and unmergeable to damos schemes. > > > These actions are used by KSM as explained in [1]. > > > > Please do that in a separate patch, and also update the document > > (Documentation/admin-guide/mm/damon/usage.rst). And, what's the expected usage > > of the action and benefits? > > The idea is to use this action to all areas that are not written too frequently, > this way KSM can save more memory without too much overhead. > But I have to test it better and collect some data to see if it really > makes sense, > perhaps it is better to leave this patch for later. > I would like to know your opinion on this, do you think it makes sense? Yes, that idea makes sense to me :) Thanks, SJ > > > -- > Atenciosamente, > Pedro Demarchi Gomes.