[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1701091925170.2692@eggly.anvils>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 19:38:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, thp: add new background defrag option
On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
> > > Any suggestions for a better name for "background" are more than welcome.
> >
> > Why not just "madvise+defer"?
> >
>
> Seeing no other activity regarding this issue (omg!), I'll wait a day or
> so to see if there are any objections to "madvise+defer" or suggestions
> that may be better and repost.
I get very confused by the /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/defrag
versus enabled flags, and this may be a terrible, even more confusing,
idea: but I've been surprised and sad to see defrag with a "defer"
option, but poor enabled without one; and it has crossed my mind that
perhaps the peculiar "madvise+defer" syntax in defrag might rather be
handled by "madvise" in defrag with "defer" in enabled? Or something
like that: 4 x 4 possibilities instead of 5 x 3.
Please be gentle with me,
Hugh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists