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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 42C22C3F2D1 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 04:40:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1AD21744 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 04:40:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="kOBtoWw+" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CA1AD21744 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 775A26B0005; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 23:40:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 725B96B0006; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 23:40:02 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 63D7C6B0007; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 23:40:02 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0040.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.40]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F8426B0005 for ; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 23:40:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin27.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12D94824556B for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 04:40:02 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76545541044.27.light89_578faa409f852 X-HE-Tag: light89_578faa409f852 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2931 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 04:40:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-231-172-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.231.172.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E9A721744; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 04:40:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1583037600; bh=gobused7njiojKjjqHPxsxE2sYg6sCzrDITBeT2chUU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=kOBtoWw+pxLOXT1F1ojHWEG/BsRFH4DkCpCzD+woTNzE3ZsGY0Gtfdg9TG7vGfEJF P6jY+hSeTZ3Gx/tEdeUBTasBiKIk50O2k6Wj5l4qcb3G+UTR0rvclOL+qgUqj632xi HIBld3Epnf9/SaD3mBpezZ+KO9z5jWmTMcCceAng= Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 20:40:00 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Hugh Dickins , Minchan Kim , Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman , kernel-team@lge.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] workingset protection/detection on the anonymous LRU list Message-Id: <20200229204000.298de32521885b8af858a50d@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20200227074748.GA18113@js1304-desktop> References: <1582175513-22601-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <20200226193942.30049da9c090b466bdc5ec23@linux-foundation.org> <20200227074748.GA18113@js1304-desktop> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:48:47 +0900 Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Hello, Andrew. > > > > * SOLUTION > > > Since this is what we want to avoid, this patchset implements workingset > > > protection. Like as the file LRU list, newly created or swap-in anonymous > > > page is started on the inactive list. Also, like as the file LRU list, > > > if enough reference happens, the page will be promoted. This simple > > > modification changes the above example as following. > > > > One wonders why on earth we weren't doing these things in the first > > place? > > I don't know. I tried to find the origin of this behaviour and found > that it's from you 18 years ago. :) > > It mentions that starting pages on the active list boosts throughput on > stupid swapstormy test but I cannot guess the exact reason of such > improvement. > > Anyway, Following is the related patch history. Could you remember > anything about it? > erm, yes, that was a long time ago ;) I guess enough other things have changed since then to necessitate a revisit!