On 6/12/19 11:44 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
On 6/7/19 8:58 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Yes, that is correct; and correctly placed. But a little more is needed:
see how mm/memory.c's transhuge_vma_suitable() will only allow a pmd to
be used instead of a pte if
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> On 6/7/19 8:58 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > Yes, that is correct; and correctly placed. But a little more is needed:
> > see how mm/memory.c's transhuge_vma_suitable() will only allow a pmd to
> > be used instead of a pte if the vma offset and size permit.
On 6/7/19 8:58 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for each
vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when checking
the eligibility for shmem vma, __transparent_hugepage_enabled() is
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for each
> vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when checking
> the eligibility for shmem vma, __transparent_hugepage_enabled() is
> called to override the result from
On 6/7/19 3:57 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
On 5/7/19 10:10 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 5/7/19 3:47 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
[Hmm, I thought, Hugh was CCed]
On Mon 06-05-19 16:37:42, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/28/19 12:13 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM,
On Fri 07-06-19 03:57:18, Hugh Dickins wrote:
[...]
> The addition of "THPeligible" without an "Anon" in its name was
> unfortunate. I suppose we're two releases too late to change that.
Well, I do not really see any reason why THPeligible should be Anon
specific at all. Even if ...
> Applying
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> On 5/7/19 10:10 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
> > On 5/7/19 3:47 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [Hmm, I thought, Hugh was CCed]
> > >
> > > On Mon 06-05-19 16:37:42, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 4/28/19 12:13 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/23/19
On 5/7/19 10:10 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 5/7/19 3:47 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
[Hmm, I thought, Hugh was CCed]
On Mon 06-05-19 16:37:42, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/28/19 12:13 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit
On 5/7/19 3:47 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
[Hmm, I thought, Hugh was CCed]
On Mon 06-05-19 16:37:42, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/28/19 12:13 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP
[Hmm, I thought, Hugh was CCed]
On Mon 06-05-19 16:37:42, Yang Shi wrote:
>
>
> On 4/28/19 12:13 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > > The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility
>
On 4/28/19 12:13 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for
each
vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when
checking
the eligibility for
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for each
vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when checking
the eligibility for shmem vma,
On Tue 23-04-19 17:22:36, Yang Shi wrote:
>
>
> On 4/23/19 11:34 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > > The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility
> > > > for each
> > > > vma")
On 4/23/19 11:34 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for
each
vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when
checking
the eligibility for
On 4/23/19 10:52 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for each
vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when checking
the eligibility for shmem vma,
On Wed 24-04-19 00:43:01, Yang Shi wrote:
> The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for each
> vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when checking
> the eligibility for shmem vma, __transparent_hugepage_enabled() is
> called to override the result from
The commit 7635d9cbe832 ("mm, thp, proc: report THP eligibility for each
vma") introduced THPeligible bit for processes' smaps. But, when checking
the eligibility for shmem vma, __transparent_hugepage_enabled() is
called to override the result from shmem_huge_enabled(). It may result
in the
17 matches
Mail list logo
