From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21920C31E40 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 13:44:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC69E208C3 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 13:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelfernandes.org header.i=@joelfernandes.org header.b="UuDLXvSX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732907AbfHFNnk (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:43:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com ([209.85.210.195]:32868 "EHLO mail-pf1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732835AbfHFNnY (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:43:24 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id g2so41545113pfq.0 for ; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 06:43:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelfernandes.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IvbA0Qi9ZdVQqNSbxozysL3Fqa9OBFyiiqy53wDpULw=; b=UuDLXvSXeYwo63iVf+Lu0ahwvUcYOzu27p9dcgydbmlpy6nzua+tt9PNukjSS6Be4q vRcxA4E5INCnPKwSUPg3krigp8ll/UXfu4lFBciOfQ91x+tJtxsbDAGtnGkpWU6B/HJH mkzPwEGTE+qSwX2QK3R1MvFtovwBfdLF5sBXA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IvbA0Qi9ZdVQqNSbxozysL3Fqa9OBFyiiqy53wDpULw=; b=KWPm+AvtlVOb5U5ZDwR8GuPQ7mGB6AQQxz1RE1mr052grnkMih5CrIGBYR7aMeA9i1 NG4V5fJuElRKdgc0Srq6u9qB/XZUvh/uPLoCyLTNW6votiyjLysUM5b0gxMTA1pMv6pO /i51mClHW0k467pkhGuICT98j07w0PniO1oGJD/VDECM0FeahNTkCFXz1IjE92fAQ0w1 OOLDb5hDpIJ+VC9JvFDFz2jhfEt+RqUL38LaMN8RpozQz+pUpzLsXjPJ67GqbzJZN9IK k2xQPY/Qie1CSU8hppRrm5qvfYbL4BNTvfAL5+CcofRZUgj+ebD4ORhmBkfxPcUkuQDS zlQA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUwsBsiTCrvcFzlGIyxpLkFdBKil1nvnB+9BdKx63V9mie0UXN8 qrif+UnGTTVkjT3Ho0nj36gmvQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw8mKqZ/XeNBFb/10DncPVZsFq6EPDftOF3wo4TDqzt8e9GiUU74z85gx7FrtAqaFlq2j2rPw== X-Received: by 2002:a62:6454:: with SMTP id y81mr3622264pfb.13.1565099003926; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 06:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:15c:6:12:9c46:e0da:efbf:69cc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b37sm44764722pjc.15.2019.08.06.06.43.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 06 Aug 2019 06:43:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:43:21 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robin Murphy , Alexey Dobriyan , Andrew Morton , Borislav Petkov , Brendan Gregg , Catalin Marinas , Christian Hansen , dancol@google.com, fmayer@google.com, "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Jonathan Corbet , Kees Cook , kernel-team@android.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Mike Rapoport , minchan@kernel.org, namhyung@google.com, paulmck@linux.ibm.com, Roman Gushchin , Stephen Rothwell , surenb@google.com, Thomas Gleixner , tkjos@google.com, Vladimir Davydov , Vlastimil Babka , Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] [RFC] arm64: Add support for idle bit in swap PTE Message-ID: <20190806134321.GA15167@google.com> References: <20190805170451.26009-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20190805170451.26009-3-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20190806084203.GJ11812@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190806103627.GA218260@google.com> <20190806104755.GR11812@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190806111446.GA117316@google.com> <20190806115703.GY11812@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190806115703.GY11812@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 01:57:03PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 06-08-19 07:14:46, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 12:47:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 06-08-19 06:36:27, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 10:42:03AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > On Mon 05-08-19 13:04:49, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > > > > > This bit will be used by idle page tracking code to correctly identify > > > > > > if a page that was swapped out was idle before it got swapped out. > > > > > > Without this PTE bit, we lose information about if a page is idle or not > > > > > > since the page frame gets unmapped. > > > > > > > > > > And why do we need that? Why cannot we simply assume all swapped out > > > > > pages to be idle? They were certainly idle enough to be reclaimed, > > > > > right? Or what does idle actualy mean here? > > > > > > > > Yes, but other than swapping, in Android a page can be forced to be swapped > > > > out as well using the new hints that Minchan is adding? > > > > > > Yes and that is effectivelly making them idle, no? > > > > That depends on how you think of it. > > I would much prefer to have it documented so that I do not have to guess ;) Sure :) > > If you are thinking of a monitoring > > process like a heap profiler, then from the heap profiler's (that only cares > > about the process it is monitoring) perspective it will look extremely odd if > > pages that are recently accessed by the process appear to be idle which would > > falsely look like those processes are leaking memory. The reality being, > > Android forced those pages into swap because of other reasons. I would like > > for the swapping mechanism, whether forced swapping or memory reclaim, not to > > interfere with the idle detection. > > Hmm, but how are you going to handle situation when the page is unmapped > and refaulted again (e.g. a normal reclaim of a pagecache)? You are > losing that information same was as in the swapout case, no? Or am I > missing something? Yes you are right, it would have the same issue, thanks for bringing it up. Should we rename this bit to PTE_IDLE and do the same thing that we are doing for swap? i.e. if (page_idle(page)) and page is a file page, then we write state into the PTE of the page. Later on refault, the PTE bit would automatically get cleared (just like it does on swap-in). But before refault, the idle tracking code sees the page as still marked idle. Do you see any issue with that? > > This is just an effort to make the idle tracking a little bit better. We > > would like to not lose the 'accessed' information of the pages. > > > > Initially, I had proposed what you are suggesting as well however the above > > reasons made me to do it like this. Also Minchan and Konstantin suggested > > this, so there are more people interested in the swap idle bit. Minchan, can > > you provide more thoughts here? (He is on 2-week vacation from today so > > hopefully replies before he vanishes ;-)). > > We can move on with the rest of the series in the mean time but I would > like to see a proper justification for the swap entries and why they > should be handled special. Ok, I will improve the changelog. > > Also assuming all swap pages as idle has other "semantic" issues. It is quite > > odd if a swapped page is automatically marked as idle without userspace > > telling it to. Consider the following set of events: 1. Userspace marks only > > a certain memory region as idle. 2. Userspace reads back the bits > > corresponding to a bigger region. Part of this bigger region is swapped. > > Userspace expects all of the pages it did not mark, to have idle bit set to > > '0' because it never marked them as idle. However if it is now surprised by > > what it read back (not all '0' read back). Since a page is swapped, it will > > be now marked "automatically" as idle as per your proposal, even if userspace > > never marked it explicity before. This would be quite confusing/ambiguous. > > OK, I see. I guess the primary question I have is how do you distinguish > Idle page which got unmapped and faulted in again from swapped out page > and refaulted - including the time the pte is not present. Ok, lets discuss more. thanks Michal! - Joel