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 54722C433F5 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 09:41:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D55586B0071; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 05:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id CDE576B0073; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 05:41:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B57386B0074; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 05:41:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0224.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.224]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0EDF6B0071 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 05:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59171183EC5BD for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 09:41:33 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79329590466.26.E619409 Received: from mail-vs1-f43.google.com (mail-vs1-f43.google.com [209.85.217.43]) by imf18.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C94351C000C for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 09:41:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vs1-f43.google.com with SMTP id a127so3089578vsa.3 for ; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 02:41:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=z7zJJ3dVoUtJLqxQIGYbqRajy422RRa0RyqoMndHc4s=; b=JkMq8F+3HtqO81NBb1mkbEohTJ6kSw94E2HbJldlJImgri78wn/U3VLQp5g3pt4vwu Oe3axNLegualBV2dfsFabBMvpDHS11gaY2Qw29J7JTL8Oa104iEKUtNyybRoQJ2sZ65U HyDQybd4LaFvI+CJyrfhdiDxb7yqzjdImxYove6PUfT25p/HG9P3Pmf5Evcb0ODwU+jS V/WwpuTXm4hM1VYORFumSwU3lEzCPKr+NA2oGfAc0U7FiEiP7MgWSFP9EzlHssjpgL+P pm+hgBbIrLJFdgk1fC7jOMsY4OnDdgy+B2/j8ina8ycxYobiXaeWtaw0biULRtVwzBDw 3WKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=z7zJJ3dVoUtJLqxQIGYbqRajy422RRa0RyqoMndHc4s=; b=l65wTkkNeAgNJGBT8br6Z6WXRod8N8/LD0/hC5IIvtL6ZlyGbXNubS6M2xoqDS2D3Z Le5MYKcjpLnsJPffgvB3+ptPb+6nU02ZMCqF9vph5Ky12V4YtLRUpF7PPC78/07Ku+MP jN6lGkhGeri+YOA/UuvN2TL8j8gOyZFi9R979Vf+C0YjYTJFegCfVrh10Nog7obv7Sxe ShKrbQNtP4/lUiHQvIZk7YWQ7uyqBRMZkSXoPZ8t9THqPRQcQ1WKzYChSsP7uIxdsW06 TpDmV2ey6PpTk6djmiYiqBdxVEqF9t6FQRFasxTgcT6wAZcY84bbZiDIA3ebDMg0IRs+ 59yg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ceUPpVxRJeIYxRCXP8nNOCZzP+HiRPhxqZF0lI7DOfrCYxbc2 p/PonTgHz42z0yuZSuzlyg4j1TN1Bp30ixEYp9kQxw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJznbN/TbVfynuU05EKXVCH2yRC1wZVWoNNxhWpZNDl5eLfDeRuTca6WXDt0On9YhbPtyNMup3nQhkj5pv50cFM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:3753:b0:325:c20e:4b1c with SMTP id u19-20020a056102375300b00325c20e4b1cmr4264725vst.84.1649324486928; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 02:41:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220407031525.2368067-1-yuzhao@google.com> <20220407183112.2cb5b627@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20220407183112.2cb5b627@canb.auug.org.au> From: Yu Zhao Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 03:41:15 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/14] Multi-Gen LRU Framework To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Linux-MM , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , Aneesh Kumar , Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , Hillf Danton , Jens Axboe , Jesse Barnes , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Linus Torvalds , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Michael Larabel , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka , Will Deacon , Ying Huang , Linux ARM , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-kernel , Kernel Page Reclaim v2 , "the arch/x86 maintainers" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Authentication-Results: imf18.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=JkMq8F+3; spf=pass (imf18.hostedemail.com: domain of yuzhao@google.com designates 209.85.217.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yuzhao@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com X-Stat-Signature: 8fwwohiaxaeaw6krpgshf5ok1fze4qru X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: C94351C000C X-HE-Tag: 1649324487-273985 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 Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 2:31 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Yu, > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 21:24:27 -0600 Yu Zhao wrote: > > > > Can you please include this patchset in linux-next? Git repo for you to fetch: > > > > https://linux-mm.googlesource.com/mglru for-linux-next > > I get a message saying "This repository is empty. Push to it to show > branches and history." :-( Sorry about this. It should work now. > > My goal is to get additional test coverage before I send a pull > > request for 5.19 to Linus. > > Good idea :-) > > > I've explored all avenues, but ultimately I've failed to rally > > substantial support from the MM stakeholders [1]. There are no pending > > technical issues against this patchset [2]. What is more concerning > > are the fundamental disagreements on priorities, methodologies, etc. > > that are not specific to this patchset and have been hindering our > > progress as a collective. (Cheers to the mutual dissatisfaction.) > > I have not been following the discussion as I am not an mm person, but > this is not a good sign. > > > While we plan to discuss those issues during the LSFMM next month, it > > doesn't seem reasonable to leave this patchset hanging in the air, > > since it has reached its maturity a while ago and there are strong > > demands from downstream kernels as well as a large user base. Thus I > > sent that pull request to Linus a couple of weeks ago, implying that > > he would have to make the final decision soon. > > > > I hope this gives enough background about what's been going on with > > this patchset. If you decide to take it and it causes you any > > troubles, please feel free to yell at me. > > > > Thanks! > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220104202227.2903605-1-yuzhao@google.com/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220326010003.3155137-1-yuzhao@google.com/ > > I had a look at those threads and I guess things are better that your > comment above implies. > > So, a couple of questions: > > Have you done a trial merge with a current linux-next tree to see what > sort of mess/pain we may already be in? Yes, the repo I prepared for you is based on the latest linux-next. There shouldn't be any conflicts. > Is it all stable enough now that it could be sent as a patch series for > Andrew to include in mmotm (with perhaps just smallish followup patches)? Yes, on multiple occasions, e.g., [1][2][3], I've claimed this patchset has an unprecedented test coverage and nobody has proven otherwise so far. Andrew suggested a cycle in linux-next [4]. So here we are :) [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/YdSuSHa%2FVjl6bPkg@google.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/YdiKVJlClB3h1Kmg@google.com/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/r/YgR+MfXjpg82QyBT@google.com/ [4] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220326134928.ad739eeecd5d0855dbdc6257@linux-foundation.org/