From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752169AbbGMXDW (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2015 19:03:22 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:35144 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751357AbbGMXDV (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2015 19:03:21 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 16:03:19 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Mel Gorman Cc: Rik van Riel , Dave Hansen , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Linux-MM , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: Increase SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX to batch TLB flushes Message-Id: <20150713160319.b4cd79d4147679f2e7538cef@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20150709081425.GU6812@suse.de> References: <1436189996-7220-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <1436189996-7220-5-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20150707162526.c8a5e49db01a72a6dcdcf84f@linux-foundation.org> <20150709081425.GU6812@suse.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 09:14:25 +0100 Mel Gorman wrote: > Overall, I would say that none of these workloads justify the patch on > its own. Reducing IPIs further is nice but we got the bulk of the > benefit from the two batching patches and after that other factors > dominate. Based on the results I have, I'd be ok with the patch being > dropped. It can be reconsidered for evaluation if someone complains > about excessive IPIs again on reclaim intensive workloads. OK, thanks. The benefit is small and there is some risk of unanticipated problems. I think I'll park the patch in -mm for now and will wait to see if something happens.