[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f495b4844ffd9ad4340051edf8744d9d5584747b.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 14:54:19 -0800
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Chris Li <chriscli@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>, Yu Zhao
<yuzhao@...gle.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, Chun-Tse Shao
<ctshao@...gle.com>, Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko
<mhocko@...e.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, Huang Ying
<ying.huang@...el.com>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>, Kairui Song
<kasong@...cent.com>, Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: swap: async free swap slot cache entries
On Wed, 2024-02-14 at 10:56 -0800, Chris Li wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 4:08 PM Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > extern bool swap_slot_cache_enabled;
> > > +extern uint8_t slot_cache_async_free __read_mostly;
> >
> > Why wouldn't you enable the async_free always?
> > Otherwise the patch looks fine to me.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Just in case someone doesn't care about this optimization and wants to
> opt out this behavior?
> Anyway, I am happy to update the patch without the sysfs control file as well.
>
At least I couldn't see a downside to enable it always in the latest
patch. I think adding an extra sysfs is unnecessary.
Tim
Powered by blists - more mailing lists