From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3171AC433E4 for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 14:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010362070E for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 14:16:11 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 010362070E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9EBAD6B0022; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 10:16:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9733F6B0023; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 10:16:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 8B3406B0024; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 10:16:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0071.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7265F6B0022 for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 10:16:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin12.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8191180D for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 14:16:11 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77051396142.12.note38_230d72626f14 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CECD18025E86 for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 14:15:40 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: note38_230d72626f14 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3091 Received: from out30-43.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-43.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.43]) by imf43.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 14:15:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R151e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e07484;MF=alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=20;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0U33fh2O_1595081725; Received: from IT-FVFX43SYHV2H.local(mailfrom:alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0U33fh2O_1595081725) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Sat, 18 Jul 2020 22:15:25 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 20/22] mm/vmscan: use relock for move_pages_to_lru To: Alexander Duyck Cc: Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Tejun Heo , Hugh Dickins , Konstantin Khlebnikov , Daniel Jordan , Yang Shi , Matthew Wilcox , Johannes Weiner , kbuild test robot , linux-mm , LKML , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Shakeel Butt , Joonsoo Kim , Wei Yang , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrey Ryabinin , Jann Horn References: <1594429136-20002-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <1594429136-20002-21-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> From: Alex Shi Message-ID: <7176001a-fa58-3281-7c6b-b25eea54bd15@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 22:15:25 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CECD18025E86 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: =E5=9C=A8 2020/7/18 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=885:44, Alexander Duyck =E5=86=99=E9=81= =93: >> if (unlikely(PageCompound(page))) { >> spin_unlock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock); >> + lruvec =3D NULL; >> destroy_compound_page(page); >> - spin_lock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock); >> } else >> list_add(&page->lru, &pages_to_free); >> > It seems like this should just be rolled into patch 19. Otherwise if > you are wanting to consider it as a "further optimization" type patch > you might pull some of the optimizations you were pushing in patch 18 > into this patch as well and just call it out as adding relocks where > there previously were none. This patch is picked from Hugh Dickin's version in my review. It could be fine to have a extra patch which no harm for anyone. :) Thanks Alex