Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mm: introduce MADV_COLD

[Minchan Kim]

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 04:53:02PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 27-06-19 07:36:50, Dave Hansen wrote:
> [...]
> > For MADV_COLD, if we defined it like this, I think we could use it for
> > both purposes (demotion and LRU movement):
> > 
> > 	Pages in the specified regions will be treated as less-recently-
> > 	accessed compared to pages in the system with similar access
> > 	frequencies.  In contrast to MADV_DONTNEED, the contents of the
> 
> you meant s@MADV_DONTNEED@MADV_FREE@ I suppose

Right, MADV_FREE is more proper because it's aging related.

> 
> > 	region are preserved.
> > 
> > It would be nice not to talk about reclaim at all since we're not
> > promising reclaim per se.

Your suggestion doesn't expose any implementation detail and could meet your
needs later. I'm okay. I will change it if others are not against of it.

Thanks, Dave.