linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
	shakeelb@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: swap: use smp_mb__after_atomic() to order LRU bit set
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 18:40:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3c13c484-8fbf-3c3a-fbe1-a40434869e55@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1584124476-76534-2-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>

On 3/13/20 7:34 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
> Memory barrier is needed after setting LRU bit, but smp_mb() is too
> strong.  Some architectures, i.e. x86, imply memory barrier with atomic
> operations, so replacing it with smp_mb__after_atomic() sounds better,
> which is nop on strong ordered machines, and full memory barriers on
> others.  With this change the vm-calability cases would perform better
> on x86, I saw total 6% improvement with this patch and previous inline
> fix.
> 
> The test data (lru-file-readtwice throughput) against v5.6-rc4:
> 	mainline	w/ inline fix	w/ both (adding this)
> 	150MB		154MB		159MB
> 
> Fixes: 9c4e6b1a7027 ("mm, mlock, vmscan: no more skipping pagevecs")
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>

According to my understanding of Documentation/memory_barriers.txt this would be
correct (but it might not say much :)

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

But i have some suggestions...

> ---
>  mm/swap.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
> index cf39d24..118bac4 100644
> --- a/mm/swap.c
> +++ b/mm/swap.c
> @@ -945,20 +945,20 @@ static void __pagevec_lru_add_fn(struct page *page, struct lruvec *lruvec,
>  	 * #0: __pagevec_lru_add_fn		#1: clear_page_mlock
>  	 *
>  	 * SetPageLRU()				TestClearPageMlocked()
> -	 * smp_mb() // explicit ordering	// above provides strict
> +	 * MB() 	// explicit ordering	// above provides strict

Why MB()? That would be the first appareance of 'MB()' in the whole tree. I
think it's fine keeping smp_mb()...

>  	 *					// ordering
>  	 * PageMlocked()			PageLRU()
>  	 *
>  	 *
>  	 * if '#1' does not observe setting of PG_lru by '#0' and fails
>  	 * isolation, the explicit barrier will make sure that page_evictable
> -	 * check will put the page in correct LRU. Without smp_mb(), SetPageLRU
> +	 * check will put the page in correct LRU. Without MB(), SetPageLRU

... same here ...

>  	 * can be reordered after PageMlocked check and can make '#1' to fail
>  	 * the isolation of the page whose Mlocked bit is cleared (#0 is also
>  	 * looking at the same page) and the evictable page will be stranded
>  	 * in an unevictable LRU.

Only here I would note that SetPageLRU() is an atomic bitop so we can use the
__after_atomic() variant. And I would move the actual SetPageLRU() call from
above the comment here right before the barrier.

>  	 */
> -	smp_mb();
> +	smp_mb__after_atomic();

Thanks.

>  
>  	if (page_evictable(page)) {
>  		lru = page_lru(page);
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-16 17:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-13 18:34 [PATCH 1/2] mm: swap: make page_evictable() inline Yang Shi
2020-03-13 18:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: swap: use smp_mb__after_atomic() to order LRU bit set Yang Shi
2020-03-16 17:40   ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2020-03-16 17:49     ` Yang Shi
2020-03-16 22:18       ` Yang Shi
2020-03-13 19:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: swap: make page_evictable() inline Shakeel Butt
2020-03-13 19:46   ` Yang Shi
2020-03-13 19:50     ` Shakeel Butt
2020-03-13 19:54       ` Yang Shi
2020-03-14 16:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-03-16 16:36   ` Yang Shi

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=3c13c484-8fbf-3c3a-fbe1-a40434869e55@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.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