From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755214Ab1EaNvj (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 May 2011 09:51:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:40680 "EHLO mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751756Ab1EaNvi (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 May 2011 09:51:38 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=eNuv+w8+P7cULyUFYssGEDHWuofce2Z5kSqYFLGoCqBMPgr7t/3LZNT7aM//iL7PI+ P3+zDKygqQMZ6xlSkNlzEzIwClPDtVDHH3xd1+6udVtOUr4ploVHT+6hwNEMwwEzshBW fW8oAwiNlYi86xRxhBGNasHTwvXTfgVpymoVE= Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 22:51:29 +0900 From: Minchan Kim To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm , LKML , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , KOSAKI Motohiro , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] vmscan: make isolate_lru_page with filter aware Message-ID: <20110531135129.GA13418@barrios-laptop> References: <48bcb7597cd5695f30381715630dc66a5d32c638.1306689214.git.minchan.kim@gmail.com> <20110531134609.GB4594@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110531134609.GB4594@cmpxchg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 03:46:09PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 03:13:45AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > In __zone_reclaim case, we don't want to shrink mapped page. > > Nonetheless, we have isolated mapped page and re-add it into > > LRU's head. It's unnecessary CPU overhead and makes LRU churning. > > > > Of course, when we isolate the page, the page might be mapped but > > when we try to migrate the page, the page would be not mapped. > > So it could be migrated. But race is rare and although it happens, > > it's no big deal. > > > > Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner > > Cc: Mel Gorman > > Cc: Rik van Riel > > Cc: Andrea Arcangeli > > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim > > --- > > mm/vmscan.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c > > index 9972356..39941c7 100644 > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c > > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c > > @@ -1395,6 +1395,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone, > > unsigned long nr_taken; > > unsigned long nr_anon; > > unsigned long nr_file; > > + enum ISOLATE_PAGE_MODE mode = ISOLATE_NONE; > > > > while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc))) { > > congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); > > @@ -1406,13 +1407,20 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone, > > > > set_reclaim_mode(priority, sc, false); > > lru_add_drain(); > > + > > + if (!sc->may_unmap) > > + mode |= ISOLATE_UNMAPPED; > > + if (!sc->may_writepage) > > + mode |= ISOLATE_CLEAN; > > + mode |= sc->reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM ? > > + ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE; > > Hmm, it would probably be cleaner to fully convert the isolation mode > into independent flags. INACTIVE, ACTIVE, BOTH is currently a > tri-state among flags, which is a bit ugly. > > mode = ISOLATE_INACTIVE; > if (!sc->may_unmap) > mode |= ISOLATE_UNMAPPED; > if (!sc->may_writepage) > mode |= ISOLATE_CLEAN; > if (sc->reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM) > mode |= ISOLATE_ACTIVE; > > What do you think? It's good point. Actually, I am trying it for unevictable page migration. I removed BOTH and insert ISOLATE_UNEVICTABLE. But it's in my queue and doesn't published yet. The summary is that I am going on that way. I will clean up it in v3, too. == Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Cleanup ISOLATE_BOTH Before 2.6.38, we just had two lru list(active/inactive). Now we have added one more lru type list. ie, unevictable. So ISOLATE_BOTH is not clear naming. This patch removes ISOLATE_BOTH and instead of it, it require to use more explicit word. This patch should not change old behavir and it's used by next patch series. == -- Kind regards Minchan Kim From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A01026B0011 for ; Tue, 31 May 2011 09:51:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwi12 with SMTP id 12so2566160pwi.14 for ; Tue, 31 May 2011 06:51:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 22:51:29 +0900 From: Minchan Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] vmscan: make isolate_lru_page with filter aware Message-ID: <20110531135129.GA13418@barrios-laptop> References: <48bcb7597cd5695f30381715630dc66a5d32c638.1306689214.git.minchan.kim@gmail.com> <20110531134609.GB4594@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110531134609.GB4594@cmpxchg.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm , LKML , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , KOSAKI Motohiro , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Andrea Arcangeli On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 03:46:09PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 03:13:45AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > In __zone_reclaim case, we don't want to shrink mapped page. > > Nonetheless, we have isolated mapped page and re-add it into > > LRU's head. It's unnecessary CPU overhead and makes LRU churning. > > > > Of course, when we isolate the page, the page might be mapped but > > when we try to migrate the page, the page would be not mapped. > > So it could be migrated. But race is rare and although it happens, > > it's no big deal. > > > > Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner > > Cc: Mel Gorman > > Cc: Rik van Riel > > Cc: Andrea Arcangeli > > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim > > --- > > mm/vmscan.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c > > index 9972356..39941c7 100644 > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c > > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c > > @@ -1395,6 +1395,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone, > > unsigned long nr_taken; > > unsigned long nr_anon; > > unsigned long nr_file; > > + enum ISOLATE_PAGE_MODE mode = ISOLATE_NONE; > > > > while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc))) { > > congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); > > @@ -1406,13 +1407,20 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct zone *zone, > > > > set_reclaim_mode(priority, sc, false); > > lru_add_drain(); > > + > > + if (!sc->may_unmap) > > + mode |= ISOLATE_UNMAPPED; > > + if (!sc->may_writepage) > > + mode |= ISOLATE_CLEAN; > > + mode |= sc->reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM ? > > + ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE; > > Hmm, it would probably be cleaner to fully convert the isolation mode > into independent flags. INACTIVE, ACTIVE, BOTH is currently a > tri-state among flags, which is a bit ugly. > > mode = ISOLATE_INACTIVE; > if (!sc->may_unmap) > mode |= ISOLATE_UNMAPPED; > if (!sc->may_writepage) > mode |= ISOLATE_CLEAN; > if (sc->reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM) > mode |= ISOLATE_ACTIVE; > > What do you think? It's good point. Actually, I am trying it for unevictable page migration. I removed BOTH and insert ISOLATE_UNEVICTABLE. But it's in my queue and doesn't published yet. The summary is that I am going on that way. I will clean up it in v3, too. == Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Cleanup ISOLATE_BOTH Before 2.6.38, we just had two lru list(active/inactive). Now we have added one more lru type list. ie, unevictable. So ISOLATE_BOTH is not clear naming. This patch removes ISOLATE_BOTH and instead of it, it require to use more explicit word. This patch should not change old behavir and it's used by next patch series. == -- Kind regards Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org