From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: mm: Question about the use of 'accessed' flags and pte_young() helper
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:52:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed3d1e19-b18b-d10e-2c86-0fb7ce3a431d@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31ef1305-1fd4-8159-a2ca-e9968a568ff0@csgroup.eu>
On 10/8/20 11:49 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> In a 10 years old commit
> (https://github.com/linuxppc/linux/commit/d069cb4373fe0d451357c4d3769623a7564dfa9f), powerpc 8xx has
> made the handling of PTE accessed bit conditional to CONFIG_SWAP.
> Since then, this has been extended to some other powerpc variants.
>
> That commit means that when CONFIG_SWAP is not selected, the accessed bit is not set by SW TLB miss
> handlers, leading to pte_young() returning garbage, or should I say possibly returning false
> allthough a page has been accessed since its access flag was reset.
>
> Looking at various mm/ places, pte_young() is used independent of CONFIG_SWAP
>
> Is it still valid the not manage accessed flags when CONFIG_SWAP is not selected ?
AFAIK it's wrong, reclaim needs it to detect accessed pages on inactive list,
via page_referenced(), including file pages (page cache) where CONFIG_SWAP plays
no role. Maybe it was different 10 years ago.
> If yes, should pte_young() always return true in that case ?
It should best work as intended. If not possible, true is maybe better, as false
will lead to inactive file list thrashing.
> While we are at it, I'm wondering whether powerpc should redefine arch_faults_on_old_pte()
> On some variants of powerpc, accessed flag is managed by HW. On others, it is managed by SW TLB miss
> handlers via page fault handling.
>
> Thanks
> Christophe
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-20 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-08 9:49 mm: Question about the use of 'accessed' flags and pte_young() helper Christophe Leroy
2020-10-20 15:52 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2020-10-20 18:33 ` Johannes Weiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ed3d1e19-b18b-d10e-2c86-0fb7ce3a431d@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).