From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
"Dike, Jeffrey G" <jeffrey.g.dike@intel.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
"lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"menage@google.com" <menage@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: remove unnecessary loop inside shrink_inactive_list()
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:09:17 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2f11576a0908210409p3f1551a4i194887abbad94e9b@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090820031723.GA25673@localhost>
2009/8/20 Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>:
> shrink_inactive_list() won't be called to scan too much pages
> (unless in hibernation code which is fine) or too few pages (ie.
> batching is taken care of by the callers). So we can just remove the
> big loop and isolate the exact number of pages requested.
>
> Just a RFC, and a scratch patch to show the basic idea.
> Please kindly NAK quick if you don't like it ;)
Hm, I think this patch taks only cleanups. right?
if so, I don't find any objection reason.
> Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> --- linux.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2009-08-20 10:16:18.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/mm/vmscan.c 2009-08-20 10:24:34.000000000 +0800
> @@ -1032,16 +1032,22 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page)
> * shrink_inactive_list() is a helper for shrink_zone(). It returns the number
> * of reclaimed pages
> */
> -static unsigned long shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long max_scan,
> +static unsigned long shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc,
> int priority, int file)
> {
> LIST_HEAD(page_list);
> struct pagevec pvec;
> - unsigned long nr_scanned = 0;
> - unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
> + unsigned long nr_reclaimed;
> struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
> - int lumpy_reclaim = 0;
> + int lumpy_reclaim;
> + struct page *page;
> + unsigned long nr_taken;
> + unsigned long nr_scan;
> + unsigned long nr_freed;
> + unsigned long nr_active;
> + unsigned int count[NR_LRU_LISTS] = { 0, };
> + int mode;
>
> /*
> * If we need a large contiguous chunk of memory, or have
> @@ -1054,21 +1060,17 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
> lumpy_reclaim = 1;
> else if (sc->order && priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2)
> lumpy_reclaim = 1;
> + else
> + lumpy_reclaim = 0;
> +
> + mode = lumpy_reclaim ? ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE;
>
> pagevec_init(&pvec, 1);
>
> lru_add_drain();
> spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> - do {
> - struct page *page;
> - unsigned long nr_taken;
> - unsigned long nr_scan;
> - unsigned long nr_freed;
> - unsigned long nr_active;
> - unsigned int count[NR_LRU_LISTS] = { 0, };
> - int mode = lumpy_reclaim ? ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE;
>
> - nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(sc->swap_cluster_max,
> + nr_taken = sc->isolate_pages(nr_to_scan,
> &page_list, &nr_scan, sc->order, mode,
> zone, sc->mem_cgroup, 0, file);
> nr_active = clear_active_flags(&page_list, count);
> @@ -1093,7 +1095,6 @@ 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);
>
> /*
> @@ -1117,7 +1118,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
> PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC);
> }
>
> - nr_reclaimed += nr_freed;
> + nr_reclaimed = nr_freed;
maybe, nr_freed can be removed perfectly. it have the same meaning as
nr_reclaimed.
> local_irq_disable();
> if (current_is_kswapd()) {
> __count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_KSWAPD, zone, nr_scan);
> @@ -1158,7 +1159,6 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
> spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> }
> }
> - } while (nr_scanned < max_scan);
> spin_unlock(&zone->lru_lock);
> done:
> local_irq_enable();
>
> --
> 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>
>
--
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:[~2009-08-21 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-20 2:49 [PATCH] mm: do batched scans for mem_cgroup Wu Fengguang
2009-08-20 2:52 ` [PATCH] mm: make nr_scan_try_batch() more safe on races Wu Fengguang
2009-08-20 3:17 ` [RFC][PATCH] mm: remove unnecessary loop inside shrink_inactive_list() Wu Fengguang
2009-08-21 11:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2009-08-21 11:22 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-08-27 0:20 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-08-20 3:13 ` [PATCH] mm: do batched scans for mem_cgroup KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-20 4:05 ` [PATCH -v2] " Wu Fengguang
2009-08-20 4:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-20 5:16 ` Balbir Singh
2009-08-21 1:39 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-08-21 1:46 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-08-20 11:01 ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-20 11:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-08-20 12:13 ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-20 12:32 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-08-21 3:55 ` Minchan Kim
2009-08-21 7:27 ` [PATCH -v2 changelog updated] " Wu Fengguang
2009-08-21 10:57 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
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=2f11576a0908210409p3f1551a4i194887abbad94e9b@mail.gmail.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=jeffrey.g.dike@intel.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--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