From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm: get_first_page_unless_zero()
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 23:13:36 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110807141336.GB1823@barrios-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1312492042-13184-4-git-send-email-walken@google.com>
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 02:07:22PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> This change introduces a new get_page_unless_zero() function, to be
> used for idle page tracking in a a future patch series. It also
> illustrates why I care about introducing the page count lock discussed
> in the previous commit.
>
> To explain the context: for idle page tracking, I am scanning pages
> at a known rate based on their physical address. I want to find out
> if pages have been referenced since the last scan using page_referenced(),
> but before that I must acquire a reference on the page and to basic
> checks about the page type. Before THP, it was safe to acquire references
> using get_page_unless_zero(), but this won't work with in THP enabled kernel
> due to the possible race with __split_huge_page_refcount(). Thus, the new
> proposed get_first_page_unless_zero() function:
>
> - must act like get_page_unless_zero() if the page is not a tail page;
> - returns 0 for tail pages.
>
> Without the page count lock I'm proposing, other approaches don't work
> as well to provide mutual exclusion with __split_huge_page_refcount():
>
> - using the zone LRU lock would work, but has a low granularity and
> exhibits contention under some of our workloads
I thougt this but it seems your concern is LRU lock contention.
This patch doesn't include any use case(Sometime it hurts reviewers)
but I expect it's in idle tracking patch set.
But we don't conclude yet idle page tracking patchset is reasonable
or not to merge mainline. So, I think it's rather rash idea.
(But I admit [1,2/3] is enough to discuss regardless of idle page tracking)
What I suggestion is as follows,
1. Replace naked page->_count accesses with accessor functions
2. page count lock
3. idle page tracking with simple lock(ex, zone->lru_lock)
4. get_first_page_unless_zero to optimize lock overhead.
--
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 internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-07 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-04 21:07 [RFC PATCH 0/3] page count lock for simpler put_page Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-04 21:07 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] mm: Replace naked page->_count accesses with accessor functions Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-04 21:07 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] mm: page count lock Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-07 14:00 ` Minchan Kim
2011-08-04 21:07 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm: get_first_page_unless_zero() Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-07 14:13 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2011-08-05 6:39 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] page count lock for simpler put_page Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-07 14:25 ` Minchan Kim
2011-08-09 11:04 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-09 22:22 ` Minchan Kim
2011-08-12 22:35 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-13 4:07 ` Minchan Kim
2011-08-12 15:36 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-08-12 16:08 ` SPAM: " Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-12 16:43 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-08-12 17:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-12 23:45 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-13 1:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-13 23:56 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-08-13 4:18 ` Minchan Kim
2011-08-12 16:57 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-08-12 17:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-08-12 17:52 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-08-12 18:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-12 19:05 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-08-12 22:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-12 22:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-08-12 18:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-12 17:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-12 17:56 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-08-12 23:02 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-12 22:50 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-08-13 4:11 ` Minchan Kim
2011-08-12 16:58 ` Andrea Arcangeli
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=20110807141336.GB1823@barrios-desktop \
--to=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=walken@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