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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FFCCC468C6 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:59:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1507C2084C for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:59:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1507C2084C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=techadventures.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731820AbeGSOmU (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:42:20 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:39428 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731804AbeGSOmT (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:42:19 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id h20-v6so6486579wmb.4 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:59:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=m9lxl6NH9FppFxQrFdHhXypzdTnxtxazSHxp69Rq0yo=; b=mPKo9PBfKBxCDQ4YSLAV2S80YNXrys/nNq7mNEHbO6VPY88jvxTkXtwVRcGFFg6Z5A H4pMPdW2iJ51B7zeiTy2caX5VeDC3rUO/XN6NuYdDSzzRbP5sYwMN2pYv8lseMbnGmk1 LYmFzAe7BC/ab4WhlxwHhE3RM+CJg15ncXxed3fyEGYitZIDPFGhHSkxrp+Vg3wuY5qi NFi0Pwk5NP1R604cSVvV90Uo4vYYmvTj92c2oF33GxoUNeV7/lu8ts9fE+Oy6Lsl/GR3 as0MXOv5lCDUbKHAZHnjZx5caZnRhc2cLsxov41xGT3gKm1krW3nZz9USq7uVLsvFC0j M1lw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEdvRs/yJMX0s/3eeW369x3M4b4af7Zvhjds3J8IlDHE1bLSMt8 Cfmmw4+cQXXvtdGGPOgyps8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcoP273dJkxklqtAN0mnYbrWklFBvJHdK0nWP34L9N7X2wm1iohmY4ctnt117grG0WF0vvY3w== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e409:: with SMTP id b9-v6mr4143456wmh.34.1532008740316; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from techadventures.net (techadventures.net. [62.201.165.239]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m17-v6sm10280339wrg.65.2018.07.19.06.58.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by techadventures.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 175E8124188; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:58:59 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:58:59 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador To: Michal Hocko Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, pasha.tatashin@oracle.com, vbabka@suse.cz, aaron.lu@intel.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Oscar Salvador Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] mm/page_alloc: Only call pgdat_set_deferred_range when the system boots Message-ID: <20180719135859.GA10988@techadventures.net> References: <20180719132740.32743-1-osalvador@techadventures.net> <20180719132740.32743-6-osalvador@techadventures.net> <20180719134622.GE7193@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180719134622.GE7193@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 03:46:22PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 19-07-18 15:27:40, osalvador@techadventures.net wrote: > > From: Oscar Salvador > > > > We should only care about deferred initialization when booting. > > Again why is this worth doing? Well, it is not a big win if that is what you meant. Those two fields are only being used when dealing with deferred pages, which only happens at boot time. If later on, free_area_init_node gets called from memhotplug code, we will also set the fields, although they will not be used. Is this a problem? No, but I think it is more clear from the code if we see when this is called. So I would say it was only for code consistency. If you think this this is not worth, I am ok with dropping it. Thanks -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3