From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ben Gamari <bgamari.foss@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] deactivate invalidated pages
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:35:57 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101129111900.82AB.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikBvHn3Tc_RKTM8tGKjK1kgEZYsBCjXZSZ+Ri+-@mail.gmail.com>
Hi
> > I don't like this change because fadvise(DONT_NEED) is rarely used
> > function and this PG_reclaim trick doesn't improve so much. In the
> > other hand, It increase VM state mess.
>
> Chick-egg problem.
> Why fadvise(DONT_NEED) is rarely used is it's hard to use effective.
> mincore + fdatasync + fadvise series is very ugly.
> This patch's goal is to solve it.
Well, I haven't put opposition to your previous patch for this reason.
I think every one have agree mincore + fdatasync + fadvise mess is ugly.
However I doubt PG_reclaim trick is so effective. I mean, _if_ it's effective, our current
streaming io heristics doesn't work so effective. It's bad. and if so, we should fix
it generically. That's the reason why I prefer to use simple add_page_to_lru_list().
Please remember why do we made this one. rsync has special io access pattern
then our streaming io detection doesn't work so good. therefore we decided to
improve manual knob. But, why do we need to make completely different behavior
manual DONT_NEED suggestion and automatic DONT_NEED detection?
That's my point.
> PG_reclaim trick would prevent working set eviction.
> If you fadvise call and there are the invalidated page which are
> dirtying in middle of inactive LRU,
> reclaimer would evict working set of inactive LRU's tail even if we
> have a invalidated page in LRU.
> It's bad.
>
> About VM state mess, PG_readahead already have done it.
> But I admit this patch could make it worse and that's why I Cced Wu Fengguang.
>
> The problem it can make is readahead confusing and working set
> eviction after writeback.
> I can add ClearPageReclaim of mark_page_accessed for clear flag if the
> page is accessed during race.
> But I didn't add it in this version because I think it's very rare case.
>
> I don't want to add new page flag due to this function or revert merge
> patch of (PG_readahead and PG_reclaim)
>
>
> >
> > However, I haven't found any fault and unworked reason in this patch.
> >
> Thanks for the good review, KOSAKI. :)
>
>
> --
> 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/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-29 2:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-28 15:02 Minchan Kim
2010-11-28 15:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] move ClearPageReclaim Minchan Kim
2010-11-29 4:25 ` Rik van Riel
2010-11-29 7:29 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-11-29 8:16 ` Minchan Kim
2010-11-29 8:26 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-11-28 15:02 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] Prevent promotion of page in madvise_dontneed Minchan Kim
2010-11-29 4:28 ` Rik van Riel
2010-11-29 4:30 ` Minchan Kim
2010-11-28 15:13 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] deactivate invalidated pages Minchan Kim
2010-11-28 19:02 ` Rik van Riel
2010-11-29 0:33 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-29 1:58 ` Ben Gamari
2010-11-29 2:13 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-29 2:26 ` Ben Gamari
2010-11-29 2:13 ` Minchan Kim
2010-11-29 2:35 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2010-11-29 7:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-11-29 8:09 ` Minchan Kim
2010-11-29 12:07 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-29 15:28 ` Minchan Kim
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=20101129111900.82AB.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bgamari.foss@gmail.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.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