Re: [PATCH mm-new 1/3] mm/khugepaged: skip unsuitable VMAs earlier in khugepaged_scan_mm_slot()

[Hugh Dickins]

On Sun, 14 Sep 2025, Lance Yang wrote:

> From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Let's skip unsuitable VMAs early in the khugepaged scan; specifically,
> mlocked VMAs should not be touched.

Why?  That's a change in behaviour, isn't it?

I'm aware that hugepage collapse on an mlocked VMA can insert a fault
latency, not universally welcome; but I've not seen discussion, let
alone agreement, that current behaviour should be changed.
Somewhere in yet-to-be-read mail?  Please give us a link.

Hugh