Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: implement POSIX_FADV_[WILL|DONT]NEED for shmem

[Charan Teja Kalla <charante@codeaurora.org>]

Thanks Suren for the reply!!

On 11/2/2021 11:42 PM, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>>> Also not sure if you need to isolate the page before this writeback.
>> Isolation may not be required but this is to avoid trying of the reclaim
>> on the same page in some parallel path as both any way places the page
>> in the swap. Or you want me to remove the isolation here?
> Maybe you could isolate them in bulk then? Seems like a waste
> isolating them one-by-one.

Okay. Should the bulk here be SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX fine?

> 
>>> Won't deleting the page from swap cache interfere with ongoing
>>> writeback if it has not yet completed?
>> I just followed the path of how to reclaim the page:
>> shrink_page_list()
>>      pageout()
>>      ..........
>>      __remove_mapping()
>>         __delete_from_swap_cache()
>>
>> You see some issue here which I can't understand.
> I think shrink_page_list() would not call __remove_mapping() if after
> pageout() PageWriteback() is still true. Maybe I'm missing some path?

I agree here. PG_writeback might have still set on the pages under
background writeback thus should be excluded.

I just considered the case for sync writes, eg:zram,  where PG_writeback
is cleared before returns.

Will update the change accordingly.

> 

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project