From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937318AbdAJNBu (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2017 08:01:50 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38754 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S937165AbdAJNBt (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jan 2017 08:01:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 14:01:46 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Corbet , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [patch] mm, thp: add new background defrag option Message-ID: <20170110130146.GF28025@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170105101330.bvhuglbbeudubgqb@techsingularity.net> <558ce85c-4cb4-8e56-6041-fc4bce2ee27f@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 09-01-17 18:19:56, 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. madvise+defer is much better than background. So if the combined (flag like approach) is too risky then I am OK with that. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs