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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC07C07E9B for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 02:47:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FFF961175 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 02:47:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0FFF961175 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A05356B0011; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 22:47:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9B57A6B0036; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 22:47:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 87CF96B006C; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 22:47:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0114.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.114]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE936B0011 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 22:47:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin33.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD9541852F1EE for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 02:47:22 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78385058724.33.F1C929F Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D14A60020AA for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 02:47:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=mAxw64Sz94EPHMADJCWDYryBxHLaiMeI1PAZCi6zx5A=; b=VkLci9zRR+PD0jWOQj2vUtvIWG JcPRx7eQ8V1q0UA1gYxOIdsbxxu3w/vWKFWd8urHiz7NZTVnnX6yueJYrlV+ON6gzZdd13Pjudufd +SifSs9SaBirLKi8Efy7LDA0yx0+R+liauU0OsvtBkoDjKzgUPqJgTkxFr9nWeQe0FndHoXXzzLfq hzUn7U0s4ZV+h9OoJPo6/Q487rcuGw7EeKxXLoOer4IFCpRDCGu96hjwjcRnKjwJY3xd+EZxyn6p9 U3SA4XTVKTOQY8CLdBSRsGk7TXT/UgWbF02xz/SyZXk0t/CLB+moD/E7VruKdoTCL+Dy2BGbQSwvY LNlmvjEg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1m62G4-008jBj-Lc; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 02:46:59 +0000 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 03:46:52 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Andrew Morton Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Folio tree for next Message-ID: References: <20210718205758.65254408be0b2a17cfad7809@linux-foundation.org> <20210720094033.46b34168@canb.auug.org.au> <20210721122102.38c80140@canb.auug.org.au> <20210720192927.98ee7809717b9cc28fa95bb6@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210720192927.98ee7809717b9cc28fa95bb6@linux-foundation.org> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4D14A60020AA X-Stat-Signature: 5k7wsa7g93gcta3yrg6dsn9naadop67e Authentication-Results: imf10.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=VkLci9zR; spf=none (imf10.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org; dmarc=none X-HE-Tag: 1626835641-986465 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 Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 07:29:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:21:02 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi Matthew, > > > > On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 03:55:44 +0100 Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > > I think conceptually, the folio for-next tree is part of mmotm for this > > > cycle. I would have asked Andrew to carry these patches, but there are > > > people (eg Dave Howells) who want to develop against them. And that's > > > hard to do with patches that are in mmotm. > > > > > > So if Andrew bases mmotm on the folio tree for this cycle, does that > > > make sense? > > > > Sure. I will have a little pain the first day it appears, but it > > should be OK after that. I am on leave starting Saturday, so if you > > could get me a tree without the mmotm patches for tomorrow that would > > be good. > > Sure, let's go that way. Linus wasn't terribly enthusiastic about the > folio patches and I can't claim to be overwhelmed by their value/churn > ratio (but many MM developers are OK with it all, and that > counts). Doing it this way retains options... I'm happy to take these three patches through my tree if it makes life easier (and it does resolve the majority of the pain): mm, memcg: add mem_cgroup_disabled checks in vmpressure and swap-related functions mm, memcg: inline mem_cgroup_{charge/uncharge} to improve disabled memcg config mm, memcg: inline swap-related functions to improve disabled memcg config Up to you, really.