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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328B4C433EF for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 23:16:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16C5F60FDA for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 23:16:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233775AbhJRXSk (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2021 19:18:40 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56266 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229608AbhJRXSi (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Oct 2021 19:18:38 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05FB0C06161C for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id x27so3190538lfu.5 for ; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:16:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shutemov-name.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=g8NcdhqdVTYivLPB/4AQ/n+hK6qI5Cqzz6EhWUcLIk4=; b=aAgTInrSiwhLMEvXKlaIEPoHz91AKhYnFSh6ZeY+8aJ0m70YuCN1AEZZBWoZtmDnc0 UH93kBEjtd+TYhT62QAI7CBjo2v93qAopTUcR6TmRLkNao76XsyoKi86VcVcxx/zguwH YPSt1VisZ9TPpfyBoJ0BFEUQoZwBYLZlh8ek71OfJvcTUwYscpaWaHuOczDDY8vjvrVI oPALskxKO+CCRY875mfkvHPAEGgkTPYrcshxB4Wqp6jjgSQe1FMFORpDo0LPNMrsgJ+0 g71o7VwLfcRnj3CRv/EWq/3SGww9AETo058msEGtDQx5bjW6V8HaEvMKTQED22hcxCCs NBDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=g8NcdhqdVTYivLPB/4AQ/n+hK6qI5Cqzz6EhWUcLIk4=; b=eKbpcGxceBbA9S+ORlVWXdv5mV+qTqxtCWS3Kdx/d7i4Do0zy+WeU4BAIp6Oj0CgxF 3CtPSVLgfXCRxqaUVznge9QOmjMID3lU9CoIoBKzf7fD5CAjPk0oHzHn1unk8zxzZDtl rH90mcuN8K20yEegkzmw3D3Rb0drB/p9wMpQZXmGLzfBB0bQpUltkpdvC8VNMrH8zw7P CH/5PHB00dGIqte+E73tz/FYK6S5xdLcA53vgXWLZKiOUeqSVyhe9ZRSj/+52vi2TEKY kGRNouad/U9Fhv6JN0DSGPfRjpHBO3PkqxNHrqB5B324zGPpNOfD+/BT9UExgI60woFU C/jw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533R11gGipi9APypEuJgCBS3MWqSCjicU3PCvGzH8tmm447DF8LL W+QvMafsHcDg40Py8Q5TdLmw2w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYZsc9DzluDfFcQYm/U5oV2+pFcKeBboxjUKEhxR81JlpIWnF73PROY1HoFW3gBKesKVPj9w== X-Received: by 2002:a19:48d1:: with SMTP id v200mr2600433lfa.47.1634598984410; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from box.localdomain ([86.57.175.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o21sm1765814ljg.93.2021.10.18.16.16.23 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:16:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by box.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A5E6610309A; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 02:16:27 +0300 (+03) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 02:16:27 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Kent Overstreet , Linus Torvalds , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , "Darrick J. Wong" , Christoph Hellwig , David Howells , Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: Folios for 5.15 request - Was: re: Folio discussion recap - Message-ID: <20211018231627.kqrnalsi74bgpoxu@box.shutemov.name> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 05:56:34PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > I don't think there will ever be consensus as long as you don't take > > the concerns of other MM developers seriously. On Friday's call, several > > people working on using large pages for anon memory told you that using > > folios for anon memory would make their lives easier, and you didn't care. > > Nope, one person claimed that it would help, and I asked how. Not > because I'm against typesafety, but because I wanted to know if there > is an aspect in there that would specifically benefit from a shared > folio type. I don't remember there being one, and I'm not against type > safety for anon pages. > > What several people *did* say at this meeting was whether you could > drop the anon stuff for now until we have consensus. My read on the meeting was that most of people had nothing against anon stuff, but asked if Willy could drop anon parts to get past your objections to move forward. You was the only person who was vocal against including anon pars. (Hugh nodded to some of your points, but I don't really know his position on folios in general and anon stuff in particular). For record: I think folios has to be applied, including anon bits. They are useful and address long standing issues with compound pages. Any future type-safety work can be done on top of it. I know it's not democracy and we don't count votes here, but we are dragging it for months and don't get closer to consensus. At some point "disagree and commit" has to be considered. -- Kirill A. Shutemov