Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: support parallel free of memory

[Aaron Lu]

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:56:02PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> I wonder if the difference would be larger if the parallelism was done
> on a higher level, something around unmap_page_range(). IIUC the current

I guess I misunderstand you in my last email - doing it at
unmap_page_range() level is essentially doing it at a per-VMA level
since it is the main function used in unmap_single_vma(). We have tried
that and felt that it's not flexible as the proposed approach since
it wouldn't parallize well for:
1 work load that uses only 1 or very few huge VMA;
2 work load that has a lot of small VMAs.

The code is nice and easy though(developed at v4.9 time frame):