From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752004AbdLNMhI (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:37:08 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:52266 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751938AbdLNMhG (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:37:06 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 04:37:01 -0800 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Wei Wang Cc: Tetsuo Handa , virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mst@redhat.com, mhocko@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mawilcox@microsoft.com, david@redhat.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net, aarcange@redhat.com, amit.shah@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, liliang.opensource@gmail.com, yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com, quan.xu@aliyun.com, nilal@redhat.com, riel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 3/7] xbitmap: add more operations Message-ID: <20171214123701.GA30288@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <1513079759-14169-1-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com> <1513079759-14169-4-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com> <201712122220.IFH05261.LtJOFFSFHVMQOO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <5A311C5E.7000304@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5A311C5E.7000304@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 08:26:06PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > On 12/12/2017 09:20 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > Can you eliminate exception path and fold all xbitmap patches into one, and > > post only one xbitmap patch without virtio-baloon changes? If exception path > > is valuable, you can add exception path after minimum version is merged. > > This series is too difficult for me to close corner cases. > > That exception path is claimed to save memory, and I don't have a strong > reason to remove that part. > Matthew, could we get your feedback on this? Sure. This code is derived from the IDA code in lib/idr.c. Eventually, I intend to reunite them. For IDA, it clearly makes sense; the first 62 entries result in allocating no memory at all, which is going to be 99% of users. After that, we allocate 128 bytes which will serve the first 1024 users. The xbitmap, as used by Wei's patches here is going to be used somewhat differently from that. I understand why Tetsuo wants the exceptional path removed; I'm not sure the gains will be as important. But if we're going to rebuild the IDA on top of the xbitmap, we need to keep them. I really want to pay more attention to this, but I need to focus on getting the XArray finished.