On Mon 05-10-20 14:05:17, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2020, at 13:39, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> consideting that 2MB THP have turned out to be quite a pain but
> situation has settled over time. Maybe our current code base is prepared
> for that much better.
> >>
> >> I am planning
On 05.10.20 21:11, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 08:33:44PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 05.10.20 20:25, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 07:27:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 05.10.20 19:16, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 03:12:55PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2020, at 11:55, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > One of the longer-term todo items is to support variable sized THPs for
> > anonymous memory, just like I've done for the pagecache. With that in
> > place, I think scaling up from PMD
On 5 Oct 2020, at 11:55, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> Yes, I think one important feature would be that we don't end up placing
>>> a gigantic page where only a handful of pages are actually
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 08:33:44PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 05.10.20 20:25, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 07:27:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> On 05.10.20 19:16, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On
> The real control of hugetlbfs comes from the interfaces provided by
> the kernel. If kernel provides similar interfaces to control page sizes
> of THPs, it should work the same as hugetlbfs. Mixing page sizes usually
> comes from system memory fragmentation and hugetlbfs does not have this
>
On 05.10.20 20:25, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 07:27:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 05.10.20 19:16, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 02.10.20 10:10,
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 07:27:47PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 05.10.20 19:16, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> >> On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 02.10.20 10:10, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 02-10-20
On 5 Oct 2020, at 13:39, David Hildenbrand wrote:
consideting that 2MB THP have turned out to be quite a pain but
situation has settled over time. Maybe our current code base is prepared
for that much better.
>>
>> I am planning to refactor my code further to reduce the amount of
>>> consideting that 2MB THP have turned out to be quite a pain but
>>> situation has settled over time. Maybe our current code base is prepared
>>> for that much better.
>
> I am planning to refactor my code further to reduce the amount of
> the added code, since PUD THP is very similar to PMD
>> I think gigantic pages are a sparse resource. Only selected applications
>> *really* depend on them and benefit from them. Let these special
>> applications handle it explicitly.
>>
>> Can we have a summary of use cases that would really benefit from this
>> change?
>
> For large machine
On 05.10.20 19:16, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>
>>> On 02.10.20 10:10, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Fri 02-10-20 09:50:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
- huge page sizes controllable by
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> > On 02.10.20 10:10, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> On Fri 02-10-20 09:50:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> - huge page sizes controllable by the userspace?
> >
> > It might be
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 04:55:53PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> > On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > Yes, I think one important feature would be that we don't end up placing
> > > a gigantic page where only a handful
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > Yes, I think one important feature would be that we don't end up placing
> > a gigantic page where only a handful of pages are actually populated
> > without green light from the
On 2 Oct 2020, at 3:50, David Hildenbrand wrote:
- huge page sizes controllable by the userspace?
>>>
>>> It might be good to allow advanced users to choose the page sizes, so they
>>> have better control of their applications.
>>
>> Could you elaborate more? Those advanced users can use
On 2 Oct 2020, at 4:30, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 02.10.20 10:10, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Fri 02-10-20 09:50:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> - huge page sizes controllable by the userspace?
>
> It might be good to allow advanced users to choose the page sizes, so they
> have
On 02.10.20 10:10, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 02-10-20 09:50:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> - huge page sizes controllable by the userspace?
It might be good to allow advanced users to choose the page sizes, so they
have better control of their applications.
>>>
>>> Could you
On Fri 02-10-20 09:50:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >>> - huge page sizes controllable by the userspace?
> >>
> >> It might be good to allow advanced users to choose the page sizes, so they
> >> have better control of their applications.
> >
> > Could you elaborate more? Those advanced users can
>>> - huge page sizes controllable by the userspace?
>>
>> It might be good to allow advanced users to choose the page sizes, so they
>> have better control of their applications.
>
> Could you elaborate more? Those advanced users can use hugetlb, right?
> They get a very good control over page
On Thu 01-10-20 11:14:14, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 30 Sep 2020, at 7:55, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Mon 28-09-20 13:53:58, Zi Yan wrote:
> >> From: Zi Yan
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This patchset adds support for 1GB PUD THP on x86_64. It is on top of
> >> v5.9-rc5-mmots-2020-09-18-21-23. It is
On 30 Sep 2020, at 7:55, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 28-09-20 13:53:58, Zi Yan wrote:
>> From: Zi Yan
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This patchset adds support for 1GB PUD THP on x86_64. It is on top of
>> v5.9-rc5-mmots-2020-09-18-21-23. It is also available at:
>>
On Mon 28-09-20 13:53:58, Zi Yan wrote:
> From: Zi Yan
>
> Hi all,
>
> This patchset adds support for 1GB PUD THP on x86_64. It is on top of
> v5.9-rc5-mmots-2020-09-18-21-23. It is also available at:
> https://github.com/x-y-z/linux-1gb-thp/tree/1gb_thp_v5.9-rc5-mmots-2020-09-18-21-23
>
>
From: Zi Yan
Hi all,
This patchset adds support for 1GB PUD THP on x86_64. It is on top of
v5.9-rc5-mmots-2020-09-18-21-23. It is also available at:
https://github.com/x-y-z/linux-1gb-thp/tree/1gb_thp_v5.9-rc5-mmots-2020-09-18-21-23
Other than PUD THP, we had some discussion on generating THPs
24 matches
Mail list logo
