On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 05:23:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:

* Kirill A. Shutemov [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 08:18:53AM +0000, Ingo Molnar wrote:

quoted

* Kirill A. Shutemov [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:27:54AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 05:08:15PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:

quoted

The first bunch of patches that prepare kernel to boot-time switching
between paging modes.

Please review and consider applying.

Ping?

Ingo, is there anything I can do to get review easier for you?

Yeah, what is the conclusion on the sub-discussion of patch #2:

  [PATCH 2/6] mm/zsmalloc: Prepare to variable MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS

... do we want to skip it entirely and use the other 5 patches?

Yes, please. MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS not variable yet in this part of the series.

And I will post some version the patch in the next part, if it will be
required.

Could we add TRULY_MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS (with a better name), to be used in places 
where memory footprint is not a big concern?

That's what I did in the patch. See MAX_POSSIBLE_PHYSMEM_BITS.
Not sure how good the name is.

Or, could we keep MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS constant, and introduce a _different_ constant 
that is dynamic, and which could be used in the cases where the 5-level paging 
config causes too much memory footprint in the common 4-level paging case?

This is more labor intensive case with unclear benefit.

Dynamic MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS doesn't cause any issue in waste majority of
cases.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>