* Re: [patch] mm-deactivate-fix-1
2001-01-14 13:40 [patch] mm-deactivate-fix-1 Zlatko Calusic
@ 2001-01-14 12:57 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-01-14 15:48 ` Zlatko Calusic
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Marcelo Tosatti @ 2001-01-14 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zlatko Calusic; +Cc: linux-mm
On 14 Jan 2001, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
> I have noticed that in deactivate_page_nolock() function pages get
> unconditionally moved from the active to the inact_dirty list. Even if
> it is really easy with additional check to put them straight to the
> inact_clean list if they're freeable. That keeps the list statistics
> more accurate and in the end should result in a little bit less CPU
> cycles burned (only one list transition, less locking). As a bonus,
> the comment above the function is now correct. :)
>
> I have tested the patch thoroughly and couldn't find any problems with
> it. It should be really safe as reclaim_page() already carefully
> checks pages before freeing.
>
> Comments?
We want to move all deactivated pages to the inactive dirty list to get
FIFO behaviour while reclaiming them.
--
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.eu.org/Linux-MM/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [patch] mm-deactivate-fix-1
@ 2001-01-14 13:40 Zlatko Calusic
2001-01-14 12:57 ` Marcelo Tosatti
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zlatko Calusic @ 2001-01-14 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mm
I have noticed that in deactivate_page_nolock() function pages get
unconditionally moved from the active to the inact_dirty list. Even if
it is really easy with additional check to put them straight to the
inact_clean list if they're freeable. That keeps the list statistics
more accurate and in the end should result in a little bit less CPU
cycles burned (only one list transition, less locking). As a bonus,
the comment above the function is now correct. :)
I have tested the patch thoroughly and couldn't find any problems with
it. It should be really safe as reclaim_page() already carefully
checks pages before freeing.
Comments?
Index: 0.19/mm/swap.c
--- 0.19/mm/swap.c Sat, 06 Jan 2001 01:48:21 +0100 zcalusic (linux24/j/17_swap.c 1.1 644)
+++ 0.19(w)/mm/swap.c Sun, 14 Jan 2001 14:05:49 +0100 zcalusic (linux24/j/17_swap.c 1.1 644)
@@ -172,7 +172,6 @@
* Besides, as long as we don't move unfreeable pages to the
* inactive_clean list it doesn't need to be perfect...
*/
- int maxcount = (page->buffers ? 3 : 2);
page->age = 0;
ClearPageReferenced(page);
@@ -180,11 +179,19 @@
* Don't touch it if it's not on the active list.
* (some pages aren't on any list at all)
*/
- if (PageActive(page) && page_count(page) <= maxcount && !page_ramdisk(page)) {
- del_page_from_active_list(page);
+ if (!PageActive(page)
+ || page_count(page) > (page->buffers ? 3 : 2)
+ || page_ramdisk(page))
+ return;
+
+ del_page_from_active_list(page);
+
+ if (page->mapping && !page->buffers && !PageDirty(page)) {
+ add_page_to_inactive_clean_list(page);
+ } else {
add_page_to_inactive_dirty_list(page);
}
-}
+}
void deactivate_page(struct page * page)
{
--
Zlatko
--
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.eu.org/Linux-MM/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] mm-deactivate-fix-1
2001-01-14 12:57 ` Marcelo Tosatti
@ 2001-01-14 15:48 ` Zlatko Calusic
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zlatko Calusic @ 2001-01-14 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcelo Tosatti; +Cc: linux-mm
Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br> writes:
> On 14 Jan 2001, Zlatko Calusic wrote:
>
> > I have noticed that in deactivate_page_nolock() function pages get
> > unconditionally moved from the active to the inact_dirty list. Even if
> > it is really easy with additional check to put them straight to the
> > inact_clean list if they're freeable. That keeps the list statistics
> > more accurate and in the end should result in a little bit less CPU
> > cycles burned (only one list transition, less locking). As a bonus,
> > the comment above the function is now correct. :)
> >
> > I have tested the patch thoroughly and couldn't find any problems with
> > it. It should be really safe as reclaim_page() already carefully
> > checks pages before freeing.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> We want to move all deactivated pages to the inactive dirty list to get
> FIFO behaviour while reclaiming them.
>
Ah, I see. Then your answer should be put above the function as a
comment. To help other souls digging around that code (like I'm
doing). :)
--
Zlatko
--
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.eu.org/Linux-MM/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-01-14 15:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-01-14 13:40 [patch] mm-deactivate-fix-1 Zlatko Calusic
2001-01-14 12:57 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-01-14 15:48 ` Zlatko Calusic
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox