[PATCH 0/3] Account the number of isolate pages

[PATCH 0/3] Account the number of isolate pages

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Hi

This patch series have following three patches.

[1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
[2/3] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix
[3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[1/3] and [2/3] are trivial code neating. [3/3] is the heart of this fix.





--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

[PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Subject: [PATCH] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

Currently, pgmoved variable have two meanings. it cause harder reviewing a bit.
This patch separate it.


Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
 mm/vmscan.c |   16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
===================================================================
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1239,7 +1239,7 @@ static void move_active_pages_to_lru(str
 static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_pages, struct zone *zone,
 			struct scan_control *sc, int priority, int file)
 {
-	unsigned long pgmoved;
+	unsigned long nr_taken;
 	unsigned long pgscanned;
 	unsigned long vm_flags;
 	LIST_HEAD(l_hold);	/* The pages which were snipped off */
@@ -1247,10 +1247,11 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
 	LIST_HEAD(l_inactive);
 	struct page *page;
 	struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
+	unsigned long nr_rotated = 0;
 
 	lru_add_drain();
 	spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
-	pgmoved = sc->isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold, &pgscanned, sc->order,
+	nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold, &pgscanned, sc->order,
 					ISOLATE_ACTIVE, zone,
 					sc->mem_cgroup, 1, file);
 	/*
@@ -1260,16 +1261,15 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
 	if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
 		zone->pages_scanned += pgscanned;
 	}
-	reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[!!file] += pgmoved;
+	reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[!!file] += nr_taken;
 
 	__count_zone_vm_events(PGREFILL, zone, pgscanned);
 	if (file)
-		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -pgmoved);
+		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
 	else
-		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -pgmoved);
+		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);
 	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 
-	pgmoved = 0;  /* count referenced (mapping) mapped pages */
 	while (!list_empty(&l_hold)) {
 		cond_resched();
 		page = lru_to_page(&l_hold);
@@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
 		/* page_referenced clears PageReferenced */
 		if (page_mapping_inuse(page) &&
 		    page_referenced(page, 0, sc->mem_cgroup, &vm_flags)) {
-			pgmoved++;
+			nr_rotated++;
 			/*
 			 * Identify referenced, file-backed active pages and
 			 * give them one more trip around the active list. So
@@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
 	 * helps balance scan pressure between file and anonymous pages in
 	 * get_scan_ratio.
 	 */
-	reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[!!file] += pgmoved;
+	reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[!!file] += nr_rotated;
 
 	move_active_pages_to_lru(zone, &l_active,
 						LRU_ACTIVE + file * LRU_FILE);


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Rik van Riel]

KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
> 
> Currently, pgmoved variable have two meanings. it cause harder reviewing a bit.
> This patch separate it.
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>

Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>

-- 
All rights reversed.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:52:34 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

>  	if (file)
> -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -pgmoved);
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
>  	else
> -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -pgmoved);
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);

we could have used __sub_zone_page_state() there.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Minchan Kim]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Andrew
Morton<akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:52:34 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>>       if (file)
>> -             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -pgmoved);
>> +             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
>>       else
>> -             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -pgmoved);
>> +             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);
>
> we could have used __sub_zone_page_state() there.

Yes. It can be changed all at once by separate patches. :)



-- 
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:52:34 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> >  	if (file)
> > -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -pgmoved);
> > +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
> >  	else
> > -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -pgmoved);
> > +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);
> 
> we could have used __sub_zone_page_state() there.

__add_zone_page_state() and __sub_zone_page_state() are no user.

Instead, we can remove it?


==============================================
Subject: Kill __{add,sub}_zone_page_state()

Currently, __add_zone_page_state() and __sub_zone_page_state() are unused.
This patch remove it.


Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
 include/linux/vmstat.h |    5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

Index: b/include/linux/vmstat.h
===================================================================
--- a/include/linux/vmstat.h
+++ b/include/linux/vmstat.h
@@ -210,11 +210,6 @@ extern void zone_statistics(struct zone 
 
 #endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */
 
-#define __add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
-		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
-#define __sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
-		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i,-(__d))
-
 #define add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d) mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
 #define sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d) mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, -(__d))
 




--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:22:30 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> -#define __add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
> -#define __sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i,-(__d))
> -

yeah, whatever, I don't think they add a lot of value personally.

I guess they're a _bit_ clearer than doing __sub_zone_page_state() with
a negated argument.  Shrug.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:22:30 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> > -#define __add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
> > -#define __sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i,-(__d))
> > -
> 
> yeah, whatever, I don't think they add a lot of value personally.
> 
> I guess they're a _bit_ clearer than doing __sub_zone_page_state() with
> a negated argument.  Shrug.

OK, I've catched your point.
I'll make all caller replacing patches.

Thanks.


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:22:30 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > -#define __add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
> > > -#define __sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i,-(__d))
> > > -
> > 
> > yeah, whatever, I don't think they add a lot of value personally.
> > 
> > I guess they're a _bit_ clearer than doing __sub_zone_page_state() with
> > a negated argument.  Shrug.
> 
> OK, I've catched your point.
> I'll make all caller replacing patches.

Please drop last mail. I was confused ;-)


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:38:21 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:22:30 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > -#define __add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
> > > -#define __sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i,-(__d))
> > > -
> > 
> > yeah, whatever, I don't think they add a lot of value personally.
> > 
> > I guess they're a _bit_ clearer than doing __sub_zone_page_state() with
> > a negated argument.  Shrug.
> 
> OK, I've catched your point.

I don't think I have a point ;)

> I'll make all caller replacing patches.

Well, if you guys think it's worth it, sure.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Minchan Kim]

Looks good to me.


On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 9:52 AM, KOSAKI
Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
>
> Currently, pgmoved variable have two meanings. it cause harder reviewing a bit.
> This patch separate it.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>


-- 
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Wu Fengguang]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 08:52:34AM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
> 
> Currently, pgmoved variable have two meanings. it cause harder reviewing a bit.
> This patch separate it.
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>

Reviewed-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com> 

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Christoph Lameter]

Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[Johannes Weiner]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 09:52:34AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
> 
> Currently, pgmoved variable have two meanings. it cause harder reviewing a bit.
> This patch separate it.
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>

Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>

Below are just minor suggestions regarding the changed code.

> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c |   16 ++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1239,7 +1239,7 @@ static void move_active_pages_to_lru(str
>  static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_pages, struct zone *zone,
>  			struct scan_control *sc, int priority, int file)
>  {
> -	unsigned long pgmoved;
> +	unsigned long nr_taken;
>  	unsigned long pgscanned;
>  	unsigned long vm_flags;
>  	LIST_HEAD(l_hold);	/* The pages which were snipped off */
> @@ -1247,10 +1247,11 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
>  	LIST_HEAD(l_inactive);
>  	struct page *page;
>  	struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
> +	unsigned long nr_rotated = 0;
>  
>  	lru_add_drain();
>  	spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> -	pgmoved = sc->isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold, &pgscanned, sc->order,
> +	nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold, &pgscanned, sc->order,
>  					ISOLATE_ACTIVE, zone,
>  					sc->mem_cgroup, 1, file);
>  	/*
> @@ -1260,16 +1261,15 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
>  	if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
>  		zone->pages_scanned += pgscanned;
>  	}
> -	reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[!!file] += pgmoved;
> +	reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[!!file] += nr_taken;

Hm, file is a boolean already, the double negation can probably be
dropped.

>  	__count_zone_vm_events(PGREFILL, zone, pgscanned);
>  	if (file)
> -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -pgmoved);
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
>  	else
> -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -pgmoved);
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);

Should perhaps be in another patch, but we could use

	__mod_zone_page_state(zone, LRU_ACTIVE + file * LRU_FILE);

like in the call to move_active_pages_to_lru().

>  	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
>  
> -	pgmoved = 0;  /* count referenced (mapping) mapped pages */
>  	while (!list_empty(&l_hold)) {
>  		cond_resched();
>  		page = lru_to_page(&l_hold);
> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
>  		/* page_referenced clears PageReferenced */
>  		if (page_mapping_inuse(page) &&
>  		    page_referenced(page, 0, sc->mem_cgroup, &vm_flags)) {
> -			pgmoved++;
> +			nr_rotated++;
>  			/*
>  			 * Identify referenced, file-backed active pages and
>  			 * give them one more trip around the active list. So
> @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
>  	 * helps balance scan pressure between file and anonymous pages in
>  	 * get_scan_ratio.
>  	 */
> -	reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[!!file] += pgmoved;
> +	reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[!!file] += nr_rotated;

file is boolean.

There is one more double negation in isolate_pages_global() that can
be dropped as well.  If you agree, I can submit all those changes in
separate patches.

	Hannes

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 09:52:34AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Subject: [PATCH] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
> > 
> > Currently, pgmoved variable have two meanings. it cause harder reviewing a bit.
> > This patch separate it.
> > 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> 
> Below are just minor suggestions regarding the changed code.
> 
> > ---
> >  mm/vmscan.c |   16 ++++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -1239,7 +1239,7 @@ static void move_active_pages_to_lru(str
> >  static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_pages, struct zone *zone,
> >  			struct scan_control *sc, int priority, int file)
> >  {
> > -	unsigned long pgmoved;
> > +	unsigned long nr_taken;
> >  	unsigned long pgscanned;
> >  	unsigned long vm_flags;
> >  	LIST_HEAD(l_hold);	/* The pages which were snipped off */
> > @@ -1247,10 +1247,11 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
> >  	LIST_HEAD(l_inactive);
> >  	struct page *page;
> >  	struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
> > +	unsigned long nr_rotated = 0;
> >  
> >  	lru_add_drain();
> >  	spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> > -	pgmoved = sc->isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold, &pgscanned, sc->order,
> > +	nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold, &pgscanned, sc->order,
> >  					ISOLATE_ACTIVE, zone,
> >  					sc->mem_cgroup, 1, file);
> >  	/*
> > @@ -1260,16 +1261,15 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
> >  	if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
> >  		zone->pages_scanned += pgscanned;
> >  	}
> > -	reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[!!file] += pgmoved;
> > +	reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[!!file] += nr_taken;
> 
> Hm, file is a boolean already, the double negation can probably be
> dropped.
> 
> >  	__count_zone_vm_events(PGREFILL, zone, pgscanned);
> >  	if (file)
> > -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -pgmoved);
> > +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
> >  	else
> > -		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -pgmoved);
> > +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);
> 
> Should perhaps be in another patch, but we could use
> 
> 	__mod_zone_page_state(zone, LRU_ACTIVE + file * LRU_FILE);
> 
> like in the call to move_active_pages_to_lru().
>
> >  	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> >  
> > -	pgmoved = 0;  /* count referenced (mapping) mapped pages */
> >  	while (!list_empty(&l_hold)) {
> >  		cond_resched();
> >  		page = lru_to_page(&l_hold);
> > @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
> >  		/* page_referenced clears PageReferenced */
> >  		if (page_mapping_inuse(page) &&
> >  		    page_referenced(page, 0, sc->mem_cgroup, &vm_flags)) {
> > -			pgmoved++;
> > +			nr_rotated++;
> >  			/*
> >  			 * Identify referenced, file-backed active pages and
> >  			 * give them one more trip around the active list. So
> > @@ -1312,7 +1312,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
> >  	 * helps balance scan pressure between file and anonymous pages in
> >  	 * get_scan_ratio.
> >  	 */
> > -	reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[!!file] += pgmoved;
> > +	reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[!!file] += nr_rotated;
> 
> file is boolean.
> 
> There is one more double negation in isolate_pages_global() that can
> be dropped as well.  If you agree, I can submit all those changes in
> separate patches.

Yeah, thanks please. 



--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

[PATCH 2/3] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Subject: [PATCH] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix

If sc->isolate_pages() return 0, we don't need to call shrink_page_list().
In past days, shrink_inactive_list() handled it properly.

But commit fb8d14e1 (three years ago commit!) breaked it. current shrink_inactive_list()
always call shrink_page_list() although isolate_pages() return 0.

This patch restore proper return value check.


Requirements:
  o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay before calling shrink_page_list().
  o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay after nr_scan related statistics
     modification.


Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
 mm/vmscan.c |   30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
===================================================================
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1071,6 +1071,20 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
 			     &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
 				zone, sc->mem_cgroup, 0, file);
+
+		if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
+			zone->pages_scanned += nr_scan;
+			if (current_is_kswapd())
+				__count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_KSWAPD, zone,
+						       nr_scan);
+			else
+				__count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_DIRECT, zone,
+						       nr_scan);
+		}
+
+		if (nr_taken == 0)
+			goto done;
+
 		nr_active = clear_active_flags(&page_list, count);
 		__count_vm_events(PGDEACTIVATE, nr_active);
 
@@ -1083,8 +1097,6 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON,
 						-count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON]);
 
-		if (scanning_global_lru(sc))
-			zone->pages_scanned += nr_scan;
 
 		reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
 		reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON];
@@ -1118,18 +1130,12 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		}
 
 		nr_reclaimed += nr_freed;
+
 		local_irq_disable();
-		if (current_is_kswapd()) {
-			__count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_KSWAPD, zone, nr_scan);
+		if (current_is_kswapd())
 			__count_vm_events(KSWAPD_STEAL, nr_freed);
-		} else if (scanning_global_lru(sc))
-			__count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_DIRECT, zone, nr_scan);
-
 		__count_zone_vm_events(PGSTEAL, zone, nr_freed);
 
-		if (nr_taken == 0)
-			goto done;
-
 		spin_lock(&zone->lru_lock);
 		/*
 		 * Put back any unfreeable pages.
@@ -1159,9 +1165,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 			}
 		}
   	} while (nr_scanned < max_scan);
-	spin_unlock(&zone->lru_lock);
+
 done:
-	local_irq_enable();
+	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 	pagevec_release(&pvec);
 	return nr_reclaimed;
 }


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix

[Rik van Riel]

KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix
> 
> If sc->isolate_pages() return 0, we don't need to call shrink_page_list().
> In past days, shrink_inactive_list() handled it properly.
> 
> But commit fb8d14e1 (three years ago commit!) breaked it. current shrink_inactive_list()
> always call shrink_page_list() although isolate_pages() return 0.
> 
> This patch restore proper return value check.
> 
> 
> Requirements:
>   o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay before calling shrink_page_list().
>   o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay after nr_scan related statistics
>      modification.
> 
> 
> Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>

Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>

-- 
All rights reversed.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix

[Minchan Kim]

Good.
I decided making patch like this since I knew this problem.
You are too diligent :)

Thanks for good attitude.

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 9:53 AM, KOSAKI
Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix
>
> If sc->isolate_pages() return 0, we don't need to call shrink_page_list().
> In past days, shrink_inactive_list() handled it properly.
>
> But commit fb8d14e1 (three years ago commit!) breaked it. current shrink_inactive_list()
> always call shrink_page_list() although isolate_pages() return 0.
>
> This patch restore proper return value check.
>
>
> Requirements:
>  o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay before calling shrink_page_list().
>  o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay after nr_scan related statistics
>     modification.
>
>
> Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>

-- 
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix

[Wu Fengguang]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 08:53:42AM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix
> 
> If sc->isolate_pages() return 0, we don't need to call shrink_page_list().
> In past days, shrink_inactive_list() handled it properly.
> 
> But commit fb8d14e1 (three years ago commit!) breaked it. current shrink_inactive_list()
> always call shrink_page_list() although isolate_pages() return 0.
> 
> This patch restore proper return value check.

Patch looks good, but there is another minor problem..

> 
> Requirements:
>   o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay before calling shrink_page_list().
>   o "nr_taken == 0" condition should stay after nr_scan related statistics
>      modification.
> 
> 
> Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c |   30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1071,6 +1071,20 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  		nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
>  			     &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
>  				zone, sc->mem_cgroup, 0, file);
> +
> +		if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
> +			zone->pages_scanned += nr_scan;
> +			if (current_is_kswapd())
> +				__count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_KSWAPD, zone,
> +						       nr_scan);
> +			else
> +				__count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_DIRECT, zone,
> +						       nr_scan);
> +		}
> +
> +		if (nr_taken == 0)
> +			goto done;

Not a newly introduced problem, but this early break might under scan
the list, if (max_scan > swap_cluster_max).  Luckily the only two
callers all call with (max_scan <= swap_cluster_max).

What shall we do? The comprehensive solution may be to
- remove the big do-while loop
- replace sc->swap_cluster_max => max_scan
- take care in the callers to not passing small max_scan values

Or to simply make this function more robust like this?

---
 mm/vmscan.c |   13 +++++++------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- linux.orig/mm/vmscan.c
+++ linux/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1098,7 +1098,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 
 	lru_add_drain();
 	spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
-	do {
+	while (nr_scanned < max_scan) {
 		struct page *page;
 		unsigned long nr_taken;
 		unsigned long nr_scan;
@@ -1112,6 +1112,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
 			     &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
 				zone, sc->mem_cgroup, 0, file);
+		nr_scanned += nr_scan;
 
 		if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
 			zone->pages_scanned += nr_scan;
@@ -1123,8 +1124,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 						       nr_scan);
 		}
 
-		if (nr_taken == 0)
-			goto done;
+		if (nr_taken == 0) {
+			cond_resched_lock(&zone->lru_lock);
+			continue;
+		}
 
 		nr_active = clear_active_flags(&page_list, count);
 		__count_vm_events(PGDEACTIVATE, nr_active);
@@ -1150,7 +1153,6 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 
 		spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 
-		nr_scanned += nr_scan;
 		nr_freed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, sc, PAGEOUT_IO_ASYNC);
 
 		/*
@@ -1212,9 +1214,8 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, -nr_anon);
 		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, -nr_file);
 
-  	} while (nr_scanned < max_scan);
+  	}
 
-done:
 	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 	pagevec_release(&pvec);
 	return nr_reclaimed;

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: shrink_inactive_lis() nr_scan accounting fix fix

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> Not a newly introduced problem, but this early break might under scan
> the list, if (max_scan > swap_cluster_max).  Luckily the only two
> callers all call with (max_scan <= swap_cluster_max).
> 
> What shall we do? The comprehensive solution may be to
> - remove the big do-while loop
> - replace sc->swap_cluster_max => max_scan
> - take care in the callers to not passing small max_scan values
> 
> Or to simply make this function more robust like this?

Sorry, I haven't catch your point. Can you please tell me your worried
scenario?




--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

[PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

ChangeLog
  Since v5
   - Rewrote the description
   - Treat page migration
  Since v4
   - Changed displaing order in show_free_areas() (as Wu's suggested)
  Since v3
   - Fixed misaccount page bug when lumby reclaim occur
  Since v2
   - Separated IsolateLRU field to Isolated(anon) and Isolated(file)
  Since v1
   - Renamed IsolatePages to IsolatedLRU

==================================
Subject: [PATCH] add isolate pages vmstat

If the system is running a heavy load of processes then concurrent reclaim
can isolate a large numbe of pages from the LRU. /proc/meminfo and the
output generated for an OOM do not show how many pages were isolated.

This patch shows the information about isolated pages.


reproduce way
-----------------------
% ./hackbench 140 process 1000
   => OOM occur

active_anon:146 inactive_anon:0 isolated_anon:49245
 active_file:79 inactive_file:18 isolated_file:113
 unevictable:0 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 buffer:39
 free:370 slab_reclaimable:309 slab_unreclaimable:5492
 mapped:53 shmem:15 pagetables:28140 bounce:0


Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/base/node.c    |    4 ++++
 fs/proc/meminfo.c      |    4 ++++
 include/linux/mmzone.h |    2 ++
 mm/migrate.c           |   11 +++++++++++
 mm/page_alloc.c        |   12 +++++++++---
 mm/vmscan.c            |   12 +++++++++++-
 mm/vmstat.c            |    2 ++
 7 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Index: b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
===================================================================
--- a/fs/proc/meminfo.c
+++ b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
@@ -65,6 +65,8 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_
 		"Active(file):   %8lu kB\n"
 		"Inactive(file): %8lu kB\n"
 		"Unevictable:    %8lu kB\n"
+		"Isolated(anon): %8lu kB\n"
+		"Isolated(file): %8lu kB\n"
 		"Mlocked:        %8lu kB\n"
 #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
 		"HighTotal:      %8lu kB\n"
@@ -110,6 +112,8 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_
 		K(pages[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE]),
 		K(pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE]),
 		K(pages[LRU_UNEVICTABLE]),
+		K(global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
+		K(global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
 		K(global_page_state(NR_MLOCK)),
 #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
 		K(i.totalhigh),
Index: b/include/linux/mmzone.h
===================================================================
--- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
+++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
@@ -100,6 +100,8 @@ enum zone_stat_item {
 	NR_BOUNCE,
 	NR_VMSCAN_WRITE,
 	NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP,	/* Writeback using temporary buffers */
+	NR_ISOLATED_ANON,	/* Temporary isolated pages from anon lru */
+	NR_ISOLATED_FILE,	/* Temporary isolated pages from file lru */
 	NR_SHMEM,		/* shmem pages (included tmpfs/GEM pages) */
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
 	NUMA_HIT,		/* allocated in intended node */
Index: b/mm/page_alloc.c
===================================================================
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -2115,16 +2115,18 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
 		}
 	}
 
-	printk("Active_anon:%lu active_file:%lu inactive_anon:%lu\n"
-		" inactive_file:%lu"
+	printk("active_anon:%lu inactive_anon:%lu isolated_anon:%lu\n"
+		" active_file:%lu inactive_file:%lu isolated_file:%lu\n"
 		" unevictable:%lu"
 		" dirty:%lu writeback:%lu unstable:%lu buffer:%lu\n"
 		" free:%lu slab_reclaimable:%lu slab_unreclaimable:%lu\n"
 		" mapped:%lu shmem:%lu pagetables:%lu bounce:%lu\n",
 		global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_ANON),
-		global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE),
 		global_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_ANON),
+		global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON),
+		global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE),
 		global_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_FILE),
+		global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE),
 		global_page_state(NR_UNEVICTABLE),
 		global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY),
 		global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK),
@@ -2152,6 +2154,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
 			" active_file:%lukB"
 			" inactive_file:%lukB"
 			" unevictable:%lukB"
+			" isolated(anon):%lukB"
+			" isolated(file):%lukB"
 			" present:%lukB"
 			" mlocked:%lukB"
 			" dirty:%lukB"
@@ -2178,6 +2182,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
 			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE)),
 			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_FILE)),
 			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_UNEVICTABLE)),
+			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
+			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
 			K(zone->present_pages),
 			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_MLOCK)),
 			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_FILE_DIRTY)),
Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
===================================================================
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1067,6 +1067,8 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		unsigned long nr_active;
 		unsigned int count[NR_LRU_LISTS] = { 0, };
 		int mode = lumpy_reclaim ? ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE;
+		unsigned long nr_anon;
+		unsigned long nr_file;
 
 		nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
 			     &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
@@ -1097,6 +1099,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON,
 						-count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON]);
 
+		nr_anon = count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON] + count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
+		nr_file = count[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE] + count[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE];
+		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, nr_anon);
+		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, nr_file);
 
 		reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
 		reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON];
@@ -1164,6 +1170,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
 				spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 			}
 		}
+		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, -nr_anon);
+		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, -nr_file);
+
   	} while (nr_scanned < max_scan);
 
 done:
@@ -1274,6 +1283,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
 		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE, -nr_taken);
 	else
 		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_ANON, -nr_taken);
+	__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON + file, nr_taken);
 	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 
 	while (!list_empty(&l_hold)) {
@@ -1324,7 +1334,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned 
 						LRU_ACTIVE + file * LRU_FILE);
 	move_active_pages_to_lru(zone, &l_inactive,
 						LRU_BASE   + file * LRU_FILE);
-
+	__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON + file, -nr_taken);
 	spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
 }
 
Index: b/mm/vmstat.c
===================================================================
--- a/mm/vmstat.c
+++ b/mm/vmstat.c
@@ -644,6 +644,8 @@ static const char * const vmstat_text[] 
 	"nr_bounce",
 	"nr_vmscan_write",
 	"nr_writeback_temp",
+	"nr_isolated_anon",
+	"nr_isolated_file",
 	"nr_shmem",
 #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
 	"numa_hit",
Index: b/drivers/base/node.c
===================================================================
--- a/drivers/base/node.c
+++ b/drivers/base/node.c
@@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ static ssize_t node_read_meminfo(struct 
 		       "Node %d Active(file):   %8lu kB\n"
 		       "Node %d Inactive(file): %8lu kB\n"
 		       "Node %d Unevictable:    %8lu kB\n"
+		       "Node %d Isolated(anon): %8lu kB\n"
+		       "Node %d Isolated(file): %8lu kB\n"
 		       "Node %d Mlocked:        %8lu kB\n"
 #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
 		       "Node %d HighTotal:      %8lu kB\n"
@@ -106,6 +108,8 @@ static ssize_t node_read_meminfo(struct 
 		       nid, K(node_page_state(nid, NR_ACTIVE_FILE)),
 		       nid, K(node_page_state(nid, NR_INACTIVE_FILE)),
 		       nid, K(node_page_state(nid, NR_UNEVICTABLE)),
+		       nid, K(node_page_state(nid, NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
+		       nid, K(node_page_state(nid, NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
 		       nid, K(node_page_state(nid, NR_MLOCK)),
 #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
 		       nid, K(i.totalhigh),
Index: b/mm/migrate.c
===================================================================
--- a/mm/migrate.c
+++ b/mm/migrate.c
@@ -67,6 +67,8 @@ int putback_lru_pages(struct list_head *
 
 	list_for_each_entry_safe(page, page2, l, lru) {
 		list_del(&page->lru);
+		dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
+				    !!page_is_file_cache(page));
 		putback_lru_page(page);
 		count++;
 	}
@@ -696,6 +698,8 @@ unlock:
  		 * restored.
  		 */
  		list_del(&page->lru);
+		dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
+				    !!page_is_file_cache(page));
 		putback_lru_page(page);
 	}
 
@@ -740,6 +744,13 @@ int migrate_pages(struct list_head *from
 	struct page *page2;
 	int swapwrite = current->flags & PF_SWAPWRITE;
 	int rc;
+	int flags;
+
+	local_irq_save(flags);
+	list_for_each_entry(page, from, lru)
+		__inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
+				      !!page_is_file_cache(page));
+	local_irq_restore(flags);
 
 	if (!swapwrite)
 		current->flags |= PF_SWAPWRITE;


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:55:47 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> ChangeLog
>   Since v5
>    - Rewrote the description
>    - Treat page migration
>   Since v4
>    - Changed displaing order in show_free_areas() (as Wu's suggested)
>   Since v3
>    - Fixed misaccount page bug when lumby reclaim occur
>   Since v2
>    - Separated IsolateLRU field to Isolated(anon) and Isolated(file)
>   Since v1
>    - Renamed IsolatePages to IsolatedLRU
> 
> ==================================
> Subject: [PATCH] add isolate pages vmstat
> 
> If the system is running a heavy load of processes then concurrent reclaim
> can isolate a large numbe of pages from the LRU. /proc/meminfo and the
> output generated for an OOM do not show how many pages were isolated.
> 
> This patch shows the information about isolated pages.
> 
> 
> reproduce way
> -----------------------
> % ./hackbench 140 process 1000
>    => OOM occur
> 
> active_anon:146 inactive_anon:0 isolated_anon:49245
>  active_file:79 inactive_file:18 isolated_file:113
>  unevictable:0 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 buffer:39
>  free:370 slab_reclaimable:309 slab_unreclaimable:5492
>  mapped:53 shmem:15 pagetables:28140 bounce:0
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Acked-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/base/node.c    |    4 ++++
>  fs/proc/meminfo.c      |    4 ++++
>  include/linux/mmzone.h |    2 ++
>  mm/migrate.c           |   11 +++++++++++
>  mm/page_alloc.c        |   12 +++++++++---
>  mm/vmscan.c            |   12 +++++++++++-
>  mm/vmstat.c            |    2 ++
>  7 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/fs/proc/meminfo.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
> @@ -65,6 +65,8 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_
>  		"Active(file):   %8lu kB\n"
>  		"Inactive(file): %8lu kB\n"
>  		"Unevictable:    %8lu kB\n"
> +		"Isolated(anon): %8lu kB\n"
> +		"Isolated(file): %8lu kB\n"
>  		"Mlocked:        %8lu kB\n"

Are these counters really important enough to justify being present in
/proc/meminfo?  They seem fairly low-level developer-only details. 
Perhaps relegate them to /proc/vmstat?

>  #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
>  		"HighTotal:      %8lu kB\n"
> @@ -110,6 +112,8 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_
>  		K(pages[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE]),
>  		K(pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE]),
>  		K(pages[LRU_UNEVICTABLE]),
> +		K(global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
> +		K(global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
>  		K(global_page_state(NR_MLOCK)),
>  #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
>  		K(i.totalhigh),
> Index: b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> ===================================================================
> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> @@ -100,6 +100,8 @@ enum zone_stat_item {
>  	NR_BOUNCE,
>  	NR_VMSCAN_WRITE,
>  	NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP,	/* Writeback using temporary buffers */
> +	NR_ISOLATED_ANON,	/* Temporary isolated pages from anon lru */
> +	NR_ISOLATED_FILE,	/* Temporary isolated pages from file lru */
>  	NR_SHMEM,		/* shmem pages (included tmpfs/GEM pages) */
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>  	NUMA_HIT,		/* allocated in intended node */
> Index: b/mm/page_alloc.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -2115,16 +2115,18 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	printk("Active_anon:%lu active_file:%lu inactive_anon:%lu\n"
> -		" inactive_file:%lu"
> +	printk("active_anon:%lu inactive_anon:%lu isolated_anon:%lu\n"
> +		" active_file:%lu inactive_file:%lu isolated_file:%lu\n"
>  		" unevictable:%lu"
>  		" dirty:%lu writeback:%lu unstable:%lu buffer:%lu\n"
>  		" free:%lu slab_reclaimable:%lu slab_unreclaimable:%lu\n"
>  		" mapped:%lu shmem:%lu pagetables:%lu bounce:%lu\n",
>  		global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_ANON),
> -		global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE),
>  		global_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_ANON),
> +		global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON),
> +		global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE),
>  		global_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_FILE),
> +		global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE),
>  		global_page_state(NR_UNEVICTABLE),
>  		global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY),
>  		global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK),
> @@ -2152,6 +2154,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
>  			" active_file:%lukB"
>  			" inactive_file:%lukB"
>  			" unevictable:%lukB"
> +			" isolated(anon):%lukB"
> +			" isolated(file):%lukB"
>  			" present:%lukB"
>  			" mlocked:%lukB"
>  			" dirty:%lukB"
> @@ -2178,6 +2182,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
>  			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE)),
>  			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_FILE)),
>  			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_UNEVICTABLE)),
> +			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
> +			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
>  			K(zone->present_pages),
>  			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_MLOCK)),
>  			K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_FILE_DIRTY)),
> Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1067,6 +1067,8 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  		unsigned long nr_active;
>  		unsigned int count[NR_LRU_LISTS] = { 0, };
>  		int mode = lumpy_reclaim ? ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE;
> +		unsigned long nr_anon;
> +		unsigned long nr_file;
>  
>  		nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
>  			     &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
> @@ -1097,6 +1099,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON,
>  						-count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON]);
>  
> +		nr_anon = count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON] + count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
> +		nr_file = count[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE] + count[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE];
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, nr_anon);
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, nr_file);
>  
>  		reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
>  		reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON];
> @@ -1164,6 +1170,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  				spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
>  			}
>  		}
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, -nr_anon);
> +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, -nr_file);
> +
>    	} while (nr_scanned < max_scan);

This is a non-trivial amount of extra stuff.  Do we really need it?


--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[Minchan Kim]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8, Size: 8754 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Andrew
Morton<akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:55:47 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> ChangeLog
>>   Since v5
>>    - Rewrote the description
>>    - Treat page migration
>>   Since v4
>>    - Changed displaing order in show_free_areas() (as Wu's suggested)
>>   Since v3
>>    - Fixed misaccount page bug when lumby reclaim occur
>>   Since v2
>>    - Separated IsolateLRU field to Isolated(anon) and Isolated(file)
>>   Since v1
>>    - Renamed IsolatePages to IsolatedLRU
>>
>> ==================================
>> Subject: [PATCH] add isolate pages vmstat
>>
>> If the system is running a heavy load of processes then concurrent reclaim
>> can isolate a large numbe of pages from the LRU. /proc/meminfo and the
>> output generated for an OOM do not show how many pages were isolated.
>>
>> This patch shows the information about isolated pages.
>>
>>
>> reproduce way
>> -----------------------
>> % ./hackbench 140 process 1000
>>    => OOM occur
>>
>> active_anon:146 inactive_anon:0 isolated_anon:49245
>>  active_file:79 inactive_file:18 isolated_file:113
>>  unevictable:0 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 buffer:39
>>  free:370 slab_reclaimable:309 slab_unreclaimable:5492
>>  mapped:53 shmem:15 pagetables:28140 bounce:0
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
>> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
>> Acked-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/base/node.c    |    4 ++++
>>  fs/proc/meminfo.c      |    4 ++++
>>  include/linux/mmzone.h |    2 ++
>>  mm/migrate.c           |   11 +++++++++++
>>  mm/page_alloc.c        |   12 +++++++++---
>>  mm/vmscan.c            |   12 +++++++++++-
>>  mm/vmstat.c            |    2 ++
>>  7 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> Index: b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- a/fs/proc/meminfo.c
>> +++ b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
>> @@ -65,6 +65,8 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_
>>               "Active(file):   %8lu kB\n"
>>               "Inactive(file): %8lu kB\n"
>>               "Unevictable:    %8lu kB\n"
>> +             "Isolated(anon): %8lu kB\n"
>> +             "Isolated(file): %8lu kB\n"
>>               "Mlocked:        %8lu kB\n"
>
> Are these counters really important enough to justify being present in
> /proc/meminfo?  They seem fairly low-level developer-only details.
> Perhaps relegate them to /proc/vmstat?
>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
>>               "HighTotal:      %8lu kB\n"
>> @@ -110,6 +112,8 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_
>>               K(pages[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE]),
>>               K(pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE]),
>>               K(pages[LRU_UNEVICTABLE]),
>> +             K(global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
>> +             K(global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
>>               K(global_page_state(NR_MLOCK)),
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
>>               K(i.totalhigh),
>> Index: b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>> ===================================================================
>> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>> @@ -100,6 +100,8 @@ enum zone_stat_item {
>>       NR_BOUNCE,
>>       NR_VMSCAN_WRITE,
>>       NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP,      /* Writeback using temporary buffers */
>> +     NR_ISOLATED_ANON,       /* Temporary isolated pages from anon lru */
>> +     NR_ISOLATED_FILE,       /* Temporary isolated pages from file lru */
>>       NR_SHMEM,               /* shmem pages (included tmpfs/GEM pages) */
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>>       NUMA_HIT,               /* allocated in intended node */
>> Index: b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -2115,16 +2115,18 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
>>               }
>>       }
>>
>> -     printk("Active_anon:%lu active_file:%lu inactive_anon:%lu\n"
>> -             " inactive_file:%lu"
>> +     printk("active_anon:%lu inactive_anon:%lu isolated_anon:%lu\n"
>> +             " active_file:%lu inactive_file:%lu isolated_file:%lu\n"
>>               " unevictable:%lu"
>>               " dirty:%lu writeback:%lu unstable:%lu buffer:%lu\n"
>>               " free:%lu slab_reclaimable:%lu slab_unreclaimable:%lu\n"
>>               " mapped:%lu shmem:%lu pagetables:%lu bounce:%lu\n",
>>               global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_ANON),
>> -             global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE),
>>               global_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_ANON),
>> +             global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON),
>> +             global_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE),
>>               global_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_FILE),
>> +             global_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE),
>>               global_page_state(NR_UNEVICTABLE),
>>               global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY),
>>               global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK),
>> @@ -2152,6 +2154,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
>>                       " active_file:%lukB"
>>                       " inactive_file:%lukB"
>>                       " unevictable:%lukB"
>> +                     " isolated(anon):%lukB"
>> +                     " isolated(file):%lukB"
>>                       " present:%lukB"
>>                       " mlocked:%lukB"
>>                       " dirty:%lukB"
>> @@ -2178,6 +2182,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
>>                       K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ACTIVE_FILE)),
>>                       K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_FILE)),
>>                       K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_UNEVICTABLE)),
>> +                     K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON)),
>> +                     K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE)),
>>                       K(zone->present_pages),
>>                       K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_MLOCK)),
>>                       K(zone_page_state(zone, NR_FILE_DIRTY)),
>> Index: b/mm/vmscan.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>> @@ -1067,6 +1067,8 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>>               unsigned long nr_active;
>>               unsigned int count[NR_LRU_LISTS] = { 0, };
>>               int mode = lumpy_reclaim ? ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE;
>> +             unsigned long nr_anon;
>> +             unsigned long nr_file;
>>
>>               nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
>>                            &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
>> @@ -1097,6 +1099,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>>               __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON,
>>                                               -count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON]);
>>
>> +             nr_anon = count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON] + count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
>> +             nr_file = count[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE] + count[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE];
>> +             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, nr_anon);
>> +             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, nr_file);
>>
>>               reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON];
>>               reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] += count[LRU_ACTIVE_ANON];
>> @@ -1164,6 +1170,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>>                               spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
>>                       }
>>               }
>> +             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, -nr_anon);
>> +             __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, -nr_file);
>> +
>>       } while (nr_scanned < max_scan);
>
> This is a non-trivial amount of extra stuff.  Do we really need it?
>

I thought so.
This patch results form process fork bomb(ex, mstctl11 in LTP).
Too many isolated patches are based on isolation counter.

So, I think we need this until now.
If we can solve the problem with different method, then we can drop this.

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
N‹§²æìr¸›zǧu©ž²Æ {\b­†éì¹»\x1c®&Þ–)îÆi¢žØ^n‡r¶‰šŽŠÝ¢j$½§$¢¸\x05¢¹¨­è§~Š'.)îÄÃ,yèm¶ŸÿÃ\f%Š{±šj+ƒðèž×¦j)Z†·Ÿ

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > reproduce way
> > -----------------------
> > % ./hackbench 140 process 1000
> >    => OOM occur
> > 
> > active_anon:146 inactive_anon:0 isolated_anon:49245
> >  active_file:79 inactive_file:18 isolated_file:113
> >  unevictable:0 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 buffer:39
> >  free:370 slab_reclaimable:309 slab_unreclaimable:5492
> >  mapped:53 shmem:15 pagetables:28140 bounce:0
> > 
> > @@ -1164,6 +1170,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
> >  				spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> >  			}
> >  		}
> > +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, -nr_anon);
> > +		__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, -nr_file);
> > +
> >    	} while (nr_scanned < max_scan);
> 
> This is a non-trivial amount of extra stuff.  Do we really need it?

In general, Administrator really hate large amount unaccounted memory.
Recent msgctl11 discussion, We faced it isolate pages about 1/3 system 
memory.
Ahtough Rik's patch is applied, vmscan can isolate >1GB memory.

That's my point.





--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> Index: b/mm/migrate.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,8 @@ int putback_lru_pages(struct list_head *
>
>  	list_for_each_entry_safe(page, page2, l, lru) {
>  		list_del(&page->lru);
> +		dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> +				    !!page_is_file_cache(page));
>  		putback_lru_page(page);
>  		count++;
>  	}

ok.

> @@ -696,6 +698,8 @@ unlock:
>   		 * restored.
>   		 */
>   		list_del(&page->lru);
> +		dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> +				    !!page_is_file_cache(page));
>  		putback_lru_page(page);
>  	}
>

ok.

> @@ -740,6 +744,13 @@ int migrate_pages(struct list_head *from
>  	struct page *page2;
>  	int swapwrite = current->flags & PF_SWAPWRITE;
>  	int rc;
> +	int flags;
> +
> +	local_irq_save(flags);
> +	list_for_each_entry(page, from, lru)
> +		__inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> +				      !!page_is_file_cache(page));
> +	local_irq_restore(flags);
>

Why do a separate pass over all the migrates pages? Can you add the
_inc_xx  somewhere after the page was isolated from the lru by calling
try_to_unmap()?

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > @@ -740,6 +744,13 @@ int migrate_pages(struct list_head *from
> >  	struct page *page2;
> >  	int swapwrite = current->flags & PF_SWAPWRITE;
> >  	int rc;
> > +	int flags;
> > +
> > +	local_irq_save(flags);
> > +	list_for_each_entry(page, from, lru)
> > +		__inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> > +				      !!page_is_file_cache(page));
> > +	local_irq_restore(flags);
> >
> 
> Why do a separate pass over all the migrates pages? Can you add the
> _inc_xx  somewhere after the page was isolated from the lru by calling
> try_to_unmap()?

calling try_to_unmap()? the pages are isolated before calling migrate_pages().
migrate_pages() have multiple caller. then I put this __inc_xx into top of
migrate_pages().



--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[Christoph Lameter]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> > Why do a separate pass over all the migrates pages? Can you add the
> > _inc_xx  somewhere after the page was isolated from the lru by calling
> > try_to_unmap()?
>
> calling try_to_unmap()? the pages are isolated before calling migrate_pages().
> migrate_pages() have multiple caller. then I put this __inc_xx into top of
> migrate_pages().

Then put the inc_xxx's where the pages are isolated.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> 
> > > Why do a separate pass over all the migrates pages? Can you add the
> > > _inc_xx  somewhere after the page was isolated from the lru by calling
> > > try_to_unmap()?
> >
> > calling try_to_unmap()? the pages are isolated before calling migrate_pages().
> > migrate_pages() have multiple caller. then I put this __inc_xx into top of
> > migrate_pages().
> 
> Then put the inc_xxx's where the pages are isolated.

Is there any benefit? Why do we need sprinkle __inc_xx to many place?



--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[Christoph Lameter]

On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> > On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> >
> > > > Why do a separate pass over all the migrates pages? Can you add the
> > > > _inc_xx  somewhere after the page was isolated from the lru by calling
> > > > try_to_unmap()?
> > >
> > > calling try_to_unmap()? the pages are isolated before calling migrate_pages().
> > > migrate_pages() have multiple caller. then I put this __inc_xx into top of
> > > migrate_pages().
> >
> > Then put the inc_xxx's where the pages are isolated.
>
> Is there any benefit? Why do we need sprinkle __inc_xx to many place?

Its only needed in one place where the pages are isolated.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] add isolate pages vmstat

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> 
> > > On Fri, 17 Jul 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Why do a separate pass over all the migrates pages? Can you add the
> > > > > _inc_xx  somewhere after the page was isolated from the lru by calling
> > > > > try_to_unmap()?
> > > >
> > > > calling try_to_unmap()? the pages are isolated before calling migrate_pages().
> > > > migrate_pages() have multiple caller. then I put this __inc_xx into top of
> > > > migrate_pages().
> > >
> > > Then put the inc_xxx's where the pages are isolated.
> >
> > Is there any benefit? Why do we need sprinkle __inc_xx to many place?
> 
> Its only needed in one place where the pages are isolated.

Umm.. I haven't understand this benefit. but I guess I can do that.
I'll think it later deeply.




--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>