From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3DC3C433EF for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 04:49:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238280AbhK3Ews (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2021 23:52:48 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34490 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238255AbhK3Ewr (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2021 23:52:47 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com (mail-qt1-x82c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E28FC061574 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:49:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id f20so18999544qtb.4 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:49:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5VlAw6hUwfomqoFCYzHKa9IiNBK9XvWT56a/Phg/YEQ=; b=bLNx1iAXaJGglaO5Te+t66JgGuPFLNPZuiN4LBi3PegmiKltgkbspWK5YZ+OElAvZN 8uRUARakN/GWYplMuXlGdTD3FSXPfFIPPP3x/UmHYADthoIn0lXzrJPKWgICXXByAb1N z+l5O6iRfISW3YTKXYGyPoSnUDmodxr7inIzemiu7MeOBapQ9fVmpv5tZVEKPhNiKzvC 4N2yGl1AMzYoREAkRgcB0Ag4G8INXdx9bogepWF0NewMgPg2+WpENSHRT8qwYvOCjpcX TXUiE0jM/ojEABPq7d1GR3ZiXAYrosUHV21cHobBNZ1IlYxw0dF+svcxFgW3y2Edv6zs ko2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5VlAw6hUwfomqoFCYzHKa9IiNBK9XvWT56a/Phg/YEQ=; b=G1IFTp8XkgEOEE1jE2ATwjDz9jzykQ9miUhOPvxtri7SMEk/6SItefzjvu2UM2Hs7T Ub8828kA6PPM9YiXNnvZol9dyEFWzzfeXJDiTl4Kd2UfSPQ9oB3Zzlw14uffGgJhuTqo v5MIOuf6J9NJFg82z1mKkjT3XrR4aL4FUlyJLf5bLKGnJfVzKfypmfym4D26cvP6wz/z 8u6CV2jmrECCr6TXP+n7GFKBpVQQYlR3rD99+CyzRLYAFVRSPqbsUJelDfM8cJehzjpw dS+GO2HFehIRQ4wyFFHslHnRwKfcLn7OvgIgiyET9SFj3gCEJ/DjRuQStP0Iu5v6tZDj DjxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533vJ4XMQTwHJvtL+Bw0rX5Bq0fUNdDLI+woKXumiRjxthw2iQ1q 6R3qEwWrB9j7NkLdaQ9mqPmWMDhlln+7ng== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwnwA85/CwNyfObYXGGmS5yCY+wucpQvxwY7b+TEhxQZZWJcg+rfWv/Q0WXmmdxcuplCJgmwQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4e28:: with SMTP id d8mr48570669qtw.11.1638247767777; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:49:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from hasanalmaruf-mbp.thefacebook.com ([2620:10d:c091:480::1:4de2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t35sm10545345qtc.83.2021.11.29.20.49.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:49:27 -0800 (PST) From: Hasan Al Maruf X-Google-Original-From: Hasan Al Maruf To: ying.huang@intel.com Cc: dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, hasan3050@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net, riel@surriel.com, yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Transparent Page Placement for Tiered-Memory Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 23:49:22 -0500 Message-Id: <20211130044922.42995-1-hasanalmaruf@fb.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <87ee6yv3ao.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <87ee6yv3ao.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Huang, >Thanks for detailed description! After reading your patchset and the >description above, I found that the basic part ([1/6] - [3/6]) of the >promotion patchset as follows can be the base for your patchset too. > >https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211116013522.140575-1-ying.huang@intel.com Yeah, I agree with you. The first 3 patches of the above series are pretty much the base of this series. We can add patch [3/5]-[5/5] after your 3 patches. Then add the patch [1/5] to include the statistics counters. >The main problem of that basic patchset is lacking review. Can I ask >you to help to review that patchset, especially the common base [1/6] - >[3/6]? If you think the rest of the patchset isn't good enough for you, >we can try to merge just [1/6] - [3/6] firstly. Do you agree? Sounds good to me. I would add my reviews within the next couple of days. Thanks, Hasan