linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kairui Song <ryncsn@gmail.com>
To: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
	Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>,  Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	 David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	 Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
	 Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
	David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>,
	 Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>,
	Leno Hou <lenohou@gmail.com>,  Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>,
	Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
	 Zicheng Wang <wangzicheng@honor.com>,
	Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@google.com>,
	 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>, Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>,
	 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/14] mm/mglru: scan and count the exact number of folios
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 01:39:48 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMgjq7D+ni+t-bLCeEmOHwt8s5+4iszCMdzzek+P-DuZYemcVQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4yH6v58oD8K56hMPp5bTYGC1Bfo3XSAViW9gWeSwLXgDw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 3:03 PM Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 12:48 AM Kairui Song via B4 Relay
> <devnull+kasong.tencent.com@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> >  static bool inc_max_seq(struct lruvec *lruvec, unsigned long seq, int swappiness)
> > @@ -4686,7 +4681,7 @@ static bool isolate_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, struct sca
> >
> >  static int scan_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
> >                        struct scan_control *sc, int type, int tier,
> > -                      struct list_head *list)
> > +                      struct list_head *list, int *isolatedp)
> >  {
> >         int i;
> >         int gen;
> > @@ -4756,11 +4751,9 @@ static int scan_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
> >                                 type ? LRU_INACTIVE_FILE : LRU_INACTIVE_ANON);
> >         if (type == LRU_GEN_FILE)
> >                 sc->nr.file_taken += isolated;
> > -       /*
> > -        * There might not be eligible folios due to reclaim_idx. Check the
> > -        * remaining to prevent livelock if it's not making progress.
> > -        */
> > -       return isolated || !remaining ? scanned : 0;
> > +
> > +       *isolatedp = isolated;
> > +       return scanned;
> >  }
> >
> >  static int get_tier_idx(struct lruvec *lruvec, int type)
> > @@ -4804,33 +4797,36 @@ static int get_type_to_scan(struct lruvec *lruvec, int swappiness)
> >
> >  static int isolate_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
> >                           struct scan_control *sc, int swappiness,
> > -                         int *type_scanned, struct list_head *list)
> > +                         struct list_head *list, int *isolated,
> > +                         int *isolate_type, int *isolate_scanned)
> >  {
> >         int i;
> > +       int scanned = 0;
>
> I would prefer to rename this to total_scanned.

Good suggestion.

>
> >         int type = get_type_to_scan(lruvec, swappiness);
> >
> >         for_each_evictable_type(i, swappiness) {
> > -               int scanned;
> > +               int type_scan;
>
> And then we keep this as "scanned".
>
> >                 int tier = get_tier_idx(lruvec, type);
> >
> > -               *type_scanned = type;
> > +               type_scan = scan_folios(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc,
> > +                                       type, tier, list, isolated);
> >
> > -               scanned = scan_folios(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, type, tier, list);
> > -               if (scanned)
> > -                       return scanned;
> > +               scanned += type_scan;
> > +               if (*isolated) {
> > +                       *isolate_type = type;
> > +                       *isolate_scanned = type_scan;
> > +                       break;
> > +               }
> >
> >                 type = !type;
> >         }
> >
> > -       return 0;
> > +       return scanned;
>
> Then
> return total_scanned;
>
> >  }
> >
> >  static int evict_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
> >                         struct scan_control *sc, int swappiness)
> >  {
> > -       int type;
> > -       int scanned;
> > -       int reclaimed;
> >         LIST_HEAD(list);
> >         LIST_HEAD(clean);
> >         struct folio *folio;
> > @@ -4838,19 +4834,23 @@ static int evict_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
> >         enum node_stat_item item;
> >         struct reclaim_stat stat;
> >         struct lru_gen_mm_walk *walk;
> > +       int scanned, reclaimed;
> > +       int isolated = 0, type, type_scanned;
> >         bool skip_retry = false;
> > -       struct lru_gen_folio *lrugen = &lruvec->lrugen;
> >         struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
> >         struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
> >
> >         lruvec_lock_irq(lruvec);
> >
> > -       scanned = isolate_folios(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, swappiness, &type, &list);
> > +       /* In case folio deletion left empty old gens, flush them */
> > +       try_to_inc_min_seq(lruvec, swappiness);
> >
> > -       scanned += try_to_inc_min_seq(lruvec, swappiness);
> > +       scanned = isolate_folios(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, swappiness,
> > +                                &list, &isolated, &type, &type_scanned);
> >
> > -       if (evictable_min_seq(lrugen->min_seq, swappiness) + MIN_NR_GENS > lrugen->max_seq)
> > -               scanned = 0;
> > +       /* Isolation might create empty gen, flush them */
> > +       if (scanned)
>
> scanned is not equal to isolated, right?
> Somehow, I feel the comment does not match the if (scanned).
> I assume sort_folio() could also create empty gen?

Yeah, you are right, it should be isolated. Usually one batch scan
always isolates a few folios so I didn't observe much difference in
testing, but I should definitely fix this. Thanks!


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-16 17:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-12 16:48 [PATCH v5 00/14] mm/mglru: improve reclaim loop and dirty folio handling Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 01/14] mm/mglru: consolidate common code for retrieving evictable size Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 02/14] mm/mglru: rename variables related to aging and rotation Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 03/14] mm/mglru: relocate the LRU scan batch limit to callers Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 04/14] mm/mglru: restructure the reclaim loop Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-16  6:33   ` Barry Song
2026-04-16 18:47   ` Kairui Song
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 05/14] mm/mglru: scan and count the exact number of folios Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-15  3:16   ` Baolin Wang
2026-04-16  7:01   ` Barry Song
2026-04-16 17:39     ` Kairui Song [this message]
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 06/14] mm/mglru: use a smaller batch for reclaim Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 07/14] mm/mglru: don't abort scan immediately right after aging Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-16  7:32   ` Barry Song
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 08/14] mm/mglru: remove redundant swap constrained check upon isolation Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-14  7:43   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-15  3:19   ` Baolin Wang
2026-04-16  9:05   ` Barry Song
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 09/14] mm/mglru: use the common routine for dirty/writeback reactivation Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-15  3:30   ` Baolin Wang
2026-04-16  9:18   ` Barry Song
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 10/14] mm/mglru: simplify and improve dirty writeback handling Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-15  3:25   ` Baolin Wang
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 11/14] mm/mglru: remove no longer used reclaim argument for folio protection Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 12/14] mm/vmscan: remove sc->file_taken Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-14  7:46   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 13/14] mm/vmscan: remove sc->unqueued_dirty Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-14  7:46   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-12 16:48 ` [PATCH v5 14/14] mm/vmscan: unify writeback reclaim statistic and throttling Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-17  2:51 ` [PATCH v5 00/14] mm/mglru: improve reclaim loop and dirty folio handling wangxinyu19
2026-04-17  2:55 ` wangxinyu19

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=CAMgjq7D+ni+t-bLCeEmOHwt8s5+4iszCMdzzek+P-DuZYemcVQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=ryncsn@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kaleshsingh@google.com \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=lenohou@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=stevensd@google.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=vernon2gm@gmail.com \
    --cc=wangzicheng@honor.com \
    --cc=weixugc@google.com \
    --cc=yuanchu@google.com \
    --cc=yuzhao@google.com \
    --cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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