[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180213135359.705680d373a482b650f38b50@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:53:59 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
Cc: steven.sistare@...cle.com, daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, mhocko@...e.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
vbabka@...e.cz, bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
bhe@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] optimize memory hotplug
On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:31:55 -0500 Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com> wrote:
> This patchset:
> - Improves hotplug performance by eliminating a number of
> struct page traverses during memory hotplug.
>
> - Fixes some issues with hotplugging, where boundaries
> were not properly checked. And on x86 block size was not properly aligned
> with end of memory
>
> - Also, potentially improves boot performance by eliminating condition from
> __init_single_page().
>
> - Adds robustness by verifying that that struct pages are correctly
> poisoned when flags are accessed.
I'm now attempting to get a 100% review rate on MM patches, which is
why I started adding my Reviewed-by: when I do that thing.
I'm not familiar enough with this code to add my own Reviewed-by:, and
we'll need to figure out what to do in such cases. I shall be sending
out periodic review-status summaries.
If you're able to identify a suitable reviewer for this work and to
offer them beer, that would help. Let's see what happens as the weeks
unfold.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists