On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 6:22 AM Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 at 13:32, Fabiano Rosas <faro...@suse.de> wrote: > > > > Hao Xiang <hao.xi...@bytedance.com> writes: > > > > > Juan Quintela had a patchset enabling zero page checking in multifd > > > threads. > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220802063907.18882-13-quint...@redhat.com/ > > > > Hmm, risky to base your series on code more than an year old. We should > > bother Juan so he sends an updated version for review. > > Also, if we do need to base another series on some older > patches, the usual way to do this is to include those > patches in the series in a suitably split-up manner, not > to squash them all together into a single patch (with no > signed-off-by tag).
Thanks for the suggestion. I didn't think that through earlier but I will make sure I send the next patchset version with Juan's changes in its original commits format. > > For "assume this as a baseline, please review the other > patches but this patch is not fit to go in", that should make > the whole patchset into an RFC patch so wo don't accidentally > apply this patch. > Doing zero page checking in the sender threads improves performance. I would like to see that change getting in sooner. But if that is not likely the case, I can either make this an RFC or just rebase the changes to the current implementation (zero page checking in the main loop). > thanks > -- PMM
