linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Linux MM Mailing List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:20:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <874p36gekt.fsf@saeurebad.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48FDE9E9.5020805@redhat.com> (Rik van Riel's message of "Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:40:41 -0400")

Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> writes:

> Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
>> I'm afraid this is now quite a bit more aggressive than the earlier
>> version.  When the fault path did a mark_page_access(), we wouldn't
>> reclaim a page when it has been faulted into several MADV_SEQUENTIAL
>> mappings but now we ignore *every* activity through such a mapping.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Perhaps we should note a reference if there are two or more accesses
>> through sequentially read mappings?
>
> That can be easily accomplished by dropping the memory.c
> part of your patch.

I thought about that, but wouldn't we count a reference in the chain

        fault -> unmap -> page_referenced()

opposed to counting _no_ reference in

        fault -> page_referenced() -> ... -> unmap

?

	Hannes

--
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>

      reply	other threads:[~2008-10-21 15:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-21 10:32 Johannes Weiner
2008-10-21 10:43 ` Nick Piggin
2008-10-21 11:33   ` [patch] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings II Johannes Weiner
2008-10-21 22:13     ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-22  0:09       ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-22  0:51         ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-22  6:39           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-10-22  7:15             ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-22  7:41               ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-24  0:21     ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 12:55       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-10-24 14:02         ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 14:31         ` Rik van Riel
2008-10-24 16:15           ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 23:48             ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 18:59           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-10-21 14:40 ` [rfc] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings Rik van Riel
2008-10-21 15:20   ` Johannes Weiner [this message]

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=874p36gekt.fsf@saeurebad.de \
    --to=hannes@saeurebad.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --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