From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.alien8.de (mail.alien8.de [65.109.113.108]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A59C3EFD03 for ; Mon, 18 May 2026 16:02:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.109.113.108 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779120147; cv=none; b=hVKLqxQEKvkA+P24R4olePX/cJI+kVYCq4oQPbbh749esb/kvqSmIkRDLM6PIVuIFfEQbk/9om9dZZMJeiQpXZfK31pdX+4p7PhjkzNIDc8/YmEBWxyj928u5Z4jDnIlMPzdoBt+nx5FVX8WM6SwouqkEuhprZ2f6D2cXNhPLuM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779120147; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DJPCVq7rsNlSx3s3NknKiimagD7AMcerHo+yoK5cf6o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qcFpp768pH3kqAKAph5zADXzvHM9IgoWRU72vlxqp1itcFWeOvZX7FyjOMiBCBnPDD1+F3WdJ5Fp9l0zvzTzvApscdgiysXQ6CRqfAfQUtXJ2Jndh2PznZOvmy1JT2PWtsarge8Y3tc2n0zNxk1Z3NF9GqWHx9gAqenbPZv07sU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=alien8.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alien8.de; dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b=EWMysskj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.109.113.108 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=alien8.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alien8.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="EWMysskj" Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alien8.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTP id 4125040E00BA; Mon, 18 May 2026 16:02:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.alien8.de Authentication-Results: mail.alien8.de (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de Received: from mail.alien8.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.alien8.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id lmiqjTVJtSoy; Mon, 18 May 2026 16:01:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=alien8; t=1779120111; bh=oxdcL8HlMLx6UKW7ioXVf3ybAt9dBzDW/T2x37WUix8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=EWMysskjAPIQHzqudvywBhw8m1byHklbNsnUNxwCM6HLYCaMTp+uyY2az//Ndcbct ODU2573H+4++uauQeAducSqh9yrzV8qswQCXyz1daXh1Kj8WIVtUGk4akdEzXbXl+R HV+k7HGyvr90ROhu6J3cK/9ha8IO1aflxTpNi1SWl77eVUy9z6tShJq9MkGr9HuoBx iIRIGSQCLyV9M0YpLQtLIvlJIO5EJEVbvosPvZLUnvMpnA2GTJIooJGDaw2RLsSlmL /TiC1c3K5VDu1dqMODwPELotugIW60v15uuWCIqzBPx07JN8lgN83/Hct8zUasX2tJ fZ1GPHi/3apIJAQrdgvnuXpO7H1ane9YGoDjeXvWqPvy5wmx4/6lwAWSRFkxs7NLdW pi1yf9yfukMNFxGCsZSeZg754aPVEAy2eN1GwwUziVtSlwToejldlqiryHjp3sRUr6 fipQ13hBR8e9w9pFfSLjQAtHUcTqHQayozOg28Ux0zRwChArursx1Akc2oYOsqtTSD wvMvYN0R0vsjo3oawLUdUXDy+k0LRsXKPMPwCSZFilPelXvvwZoXb0PYJEtnpYKUB0 1ZEvGBK9eYqSOnnjQd/mOv4l8RgPC5v5TXQVa3yPE+7Q+bOt5tlZFvnVRNT3p1zHXj XJTQZnLhN3o4lK5BFXeDHwoE= Received: from stx.tnic (unknown [IPv6:2600:1700:38ca:c00:b8a3:f58e:8829:9ca6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.alien8.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 7FD6740E00B8; Mon, 18 May 2026 16:01:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 09:01:27 -0700 From: Borislav Petkov To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" Cc: "Garg, Shivank" , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R . Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Dave Hansen , "H . Peter Anvin" , Ankur Arora , Bharata B Rao , Hrushikesh Salunke , David Rientjes , sandipan.das@amd.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] mm: batch page copies in folio_copy() and folio_mc_copy() Message-ID: <20260518160036.GAags3pIMyN8YN7fPw@fat_crate.local> References: <20260427142036.111940-2-shivankg@amd.com> <20260427142036.111940-4-shivankg@amd.com> <073e5e2c-7102-4141-b0d7-fa5635f811f5@kernel.org> <6a5e794a-a608-4126-9abe-0d512a57dd67@amd.com> <60fb497d-a35a-42b9-8bf1-7f9ccbde8ade@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <60fb497d-a35a-42b9-8bf1-7f9ccbde8ade@kernel.org> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 10:43:22AM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > I was wondering whether optimizing memcpy() further would be of value elsewhere. > > Of course, we wouldn't want to degrade it :) > > Some direction from x86 folks would be nice. We can talk about it... :) With the proper perf numbers to back the changes up and if we don't regress others, we could look at improving the !FSRM situation. Make sure to CC Linus on those patches as he likes to look at optimizations there, as one can see from who changed things around that area. :-) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette