linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de>,
	Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
Subject: Re: MM patches against 2.5.31
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 16:58:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D6AC0BB.FE65D5F7@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200208261809.45568.tomlins@cam.org>

Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> 
> This seems to have been missed:

Still thinking about it.

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> > In article <3D6989F7.9ED1948A@zip.com.au>,
> > Andrew Morton  <akpm@zip.com.au> wrote:
> >>
> >>What I'm inclined to do there is to change __page_cache_release()
> >>to not attempt to free the page at all.  Just let it sit on the
> >>LRU until page reclaim encounters it.  With the anon-free-via-pagevec
> >>patch, very, very, very few pages actually get their final release in
> >>__page_cache_release() - zero on uniprocessor, I expect.
> >
> > If you do this, then I would personally suggest a conceptually different
> > approach: make the LRU list count towards the page count.  That will
> > _automatically_ result in what you describe - if a page is on the LRU
> > list, then "freeing" it will always just decrement the count, and the
> > _real_ free comes from walking the LRU list and considering count==1 to
> > be trivially freeable.
> >
> > That way you don't have to have separate functions for releasing
> > different kinds of pages (we've seen how nasty that was from a
> > maintainance standpoint already with the "put_page vs
> > page_cache_release" thing).
> >
> > Ehh?
> 
> If every structure locks before removing its reference (ie before testing and/or
> removing a lru reference we take zone->lru_lock, for slabs take cachep->spinlock
> etc)  Its a bit of an audit task to make sure the various locks are taken (and
> documented) though.
> 
> By leting the actual free be lazy as Linus suggests things should simplify nicely.

Well we wouldn't want to leave tons of free pages on the LRU - the
VM would needlessly reclaim pagecache before finding the free pages.  And
higher-order page allocations could suffer.

If we go for explicit lru removal in truncate and zap_pte_range
then this approach may be best.  Still thinking about 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/

  reply	other threads:[~2002-08-26 23:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-26 22:09 Ed Tomlinson
2002-08-26 23:58 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-08-27  0:13   ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-28 17:06   ` slablru for 2.5.32-mm1 Ed Tomlinson
2002-08-28 21:24     ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-28 22:23       ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-02  5:26     ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-02 15:00       ` Ed Tomlinson
2002-09-02 18:35         ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-02 19:09           ` Ed Tomlinson
2002-09-02 19:51             ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-02  6:50     ` Andrew Morton
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-08-22  2:29 MM patches against 2.5.31 Andrew Morton
2002-08-22 11:28 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-26  1:52   ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-26  9:10     ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-26 14:22       ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-26 15:29         ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-26 17:56           ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-26 19:24             ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-26 19:34               ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-26 19:48               ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-27  9:22               ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-27 19:19                 ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-26 20:00             ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-26 20:09               ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-26 20:58                 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-27 16:48                   ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-28 13:14                     ` Christian Ehrhardt
2002-08-28 17:18                       ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-28 17:42                         ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-28 20:41                       ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-28 21:03                         ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-28 22:04                           ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-28 22:39                             ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-28 22:57                               ` Daniel Phillips
2002-08-26 21:31                 ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-27  3:42                   ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-08-27  4:37                     ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-22 15:59 ` Steven Cole
2002-08-22 16:06   ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-22 19:45     ` Steven Cole
2002-08-26  2:15     ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-26  2:08       ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-08-26  2:32         ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-26  3:06           ` Steven Cole

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=3D6AC0BB.FE65D5F7@zip.com.au \
    --to=akpm@zip.com.au \
    --cc=ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=phillips@arcor.de \
    --cc=tomlins@cam.org \
    /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