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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable 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 9E37AC04E87 for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 10:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CBF217D4 for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 10:34:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1558434877; bh=4pcR0Y7ezSPmwoolKrytC4V9G/OZ9llkZa4QM8dX6LA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=AhmhKxJWC6L3On/0amPwObpTEmj8L5cU2w9KTKquJqfSSzz4bYWnpSFYsNWfWSmWE IEv/TvzauppcS6uzOtDnHNFqtJYLolWsIjAEOCbifdaglKC5rfff2rcpmgCftN7Za3 a+g7n/NuNHEP84TPKl9pkfESI5xX6MlV7OCzcFEg= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727655AbfEUKeg (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2019 06:34:36 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36586 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726138AbfEUKeg (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2019 06:34:36 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D287ABF4; Tue, 21 May 2019 10:34:34 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 12:34:33 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Tim Murray , Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-mm , Johannes Weiner , Joel Fernandes , Suren Baghdasaryan , Daniel Colascione , Shakeel Butt , Sonny Rao , Brian Geffon Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] introduce memory hinting API for external process Message-ID: <20190521103433.GL32329@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190520035254.57579-1-minchan@kernel.org> <1754d0ef-6756-d88b-f728-17b1fe5d5b07@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1754d0ef-6756-d88b-f728-17b1fe5d5b07@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 21-05-19 08:25:55, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 05/20/2019 10:29 PM, Tim Murray wrote: [...] > > not seem to introduce a noticeable hot start penalty, not does it > > cause an increase in performance problems later in the app's > > lifecycle. I've measured with and without process_madvise, and the > > differences are within our noise bounds. Second, because we're not > > That is assuming that post process_madvise() working set for the application is > always smaller. There is another challenge. The external process should ideally > have the knowledge of active areas of the working set for an application in > question for it to invoke process_madvise() correctly to prevent such scenarios. But that doesn't really seem relevant for the API itself, right? The higher level logic the monitor's business. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs