From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com>
Cc: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: don't flush TLB when propagate PTE access bit to struct page.
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 11:45:29 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101029114529.4d3a8b9c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikdE---MJ-LSwNHEniCphvwu0T2apkWzGsRQ8i=@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:30:23 -0700
Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 5:11 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > I'd like to vote for batching.
>
> Batch mode isn't going to add much value because the effect of
> accessed bit is already deferred. There are two outcome: (1) the tlb
> mapping is already flushed due to capacity conflict or (2) process
> context'ed out. You would want to transfer accessed bit from pte to
> page table, but flushing TLB on a already deferred operation seems not
> that useful.
>
Hmm. Without flushing anywhere in memory reclaim path, a process which
cause page fault and enter vmscan will not see his own recent access bit on
pages in LRU ?
I think it should be flushed at least once..
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-29 2:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-27 17:21 Ying Han
2010-10-27 18:05 ` Rik van Riel
2010-10-27 18:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-10-27 18:37 ` Nick Piggin
2010-10-27 19:13 ` Hugh Dickins
2010-10-27 20:35 ` Ying Han
2010-10-28 0:11 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-10-29 1:30 ` Ken Chen
2010-10-29 2:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2010-10-29 3:43 ` Rik van Riel
2010-10-29 4:27 ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-29 12:31 ` Rik van Riel
2010-10-29 13:03 ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-29 13:15 ` Rik van Riel
2010-10-30 0:20 ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-27 20:19 ` Ying Han
2010-10-28 11:53 ` Rik van Riel
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=20101029114529.4d3a8b9c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kenchen@google.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=yinghan@google.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