From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Get rid of scan_control
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:54:35 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0602130951110.1825@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060211235333.71f48a66.akpm@osdl.org>
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> zone_reclaim() is pretty obscure and could do with some comments. What's
> it _really_ trying to do, and how does it do it? What is that timer there
> for and how is it supposed to work? Why on earth does it set PF_MEMALLOC,
> things like that.
>
> I'd have thought that looking at the zone's free_pages thingies would give
> a pretty good approximation to "how much memory did shrink_slab() give us".
But that would mean we need to apply the same set of criteria as in
__alloc_pages(). Its just happening for one allocation and so I thought
it is not worth dragging all the stuff from __alloc_pages() into vmscan.c.
Here is a cleanup patch with more comments:
zone_reclaim additional comments and cleanup
This patch adds some comments to explain how zone reclaim works.
And it fixes the following issues:
- PF_SWAPWRITE needs to be set for RECLAIM_SWAP to be able to write
out pages to swap. Currently RECLAIM_SWAP may not do that.
- remove setting sc.nr_reclaimed pages after slab reclaim since the
slab shrinking code does not use that and the nr_reclaimed pages
is just right for the intended follow up action.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc3/mm/vmscan.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc3.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2006-02-12 16:27:25.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc3/mm/vmscan.c 2006-02-13 09:45:05.000000000 -0800
@@ -1870,22 +1870,37 @@ int zone_reclaim_interval __read_mostly
*/
int zone_reclaim(struct zone *zone, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
{
- int nr_pages;
+ int nr_pages; /* Minimum pages needed in order to stay on node */
struct task_struct *p = current;
struct reclaim_state reclaim_state;
struct scan_control sc;
cpumask_t mask;
int node_id;
+ /*
+ * Do not reclaim if there was a recent unsuccessful attempt at
+ * zone reclaim. In that case we let allocations go off node for
+ * the zone_reclaim_interval. Otherwise we would scan for each off
+ * node page allocation.
+ */
if (time_before(jiffies,
zone->last_unsuccessful_zone_reclaim + zone_reclaim_interval))
return 0;
+ /*
+ * Avoid concurrent zone reclaims, do not reclaim in a zone that
+ * does not have reclaimable pages and if we should not delay
+ * the allocation then do not scan.
+ */
if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT) ||
zone->all_unreclaimable ||
atomic_read(&zone->reclaim_in_progress) > 0)
return 0;
+ /*
+ * Only reclaim in the zones that are local or in zones
+ * that are on nodes without processors.
+ */
node_id = zone->zone_pgdat->node_id;
mask = node_to_cpumask(node_id);
if (!cpus_empty(mask) && node_id != numa_node_id())
@@ -1908,7 +1923,12 @@ int zone_reclaim(struct zone *zone, gfp_
sc.swap_cluster_max = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX;
cond_resched();
- p->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC;
+ /*
+ * We need to be able to allocate from the reserves for RECLAIM_SWAP
+ * and we also need to be able to write out pages for RECLAIM_WRITE
+ * and RECLAIM_SWAP.
+ */
+ p->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC | PF_SWAPWRITE;
reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab = 0;
p->reclaim_state = &reclaim_state;
@@ -1922,23 +1942,29 @@ int zone_reclaim(struct zone *zone, gfp_
} while (sc.nr_reclaimed < nr_pages && sc.priority > 0);
- if (sc.nr_reclaimed < nr_pages && (zone_reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_SLAB)) {
+ if (sc.nr_reclaimed < nr_pages && (zone_reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_SLAB))
/*
* shrink_slab does not currently allow us to determine
- * how many pages were freed in the zone. So we just
- * shake the slab and then go offnode for a single allocation.
+ * how many pages were freed in this zone. So we just
+ * shake the slab a bit and then go off node for this
+ * particular allocation despite possibly having freed enough
+ * memory to allocate in this zone. If we freed local memory
+ * then the next allocations will be local again.
*
* shrink_slab will free memory on all zones and may take
* a long time.
*/
shrink_slab(sc.nr_scanned, gfp_mask, order);
- sc.nr_reclaimed = 1; /* Avoid getting the off node timeout */
- }
p->reclaim_state = NULL;
- current->flags &= ~PF_MEMALLOC;
+ current->flags &= ~(PF_MEMALLOC | PF_SWAPWRITE);
if (sc.nr_reclaimed == 0)
+ /*
+ * We were unable to reclaim enough pages to stay on node.
+ * We now allow off node accesses for a certain time period
+ * before trying again to reclaim pages from the local zone.
+ */
zone->last_unsuccessful_zone_reclaim = jiffies;
return sc.nr_reclaimed >= nr_pages;
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-13 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-10 5:02 Christoph Lameter
2006-02-11 4:53 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2006-02-11 9:32 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-11 9:46 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-12 3:33 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-12 3:47 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-12 4:08 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-12 4:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-12 5:01 ` Nick Piggin
2006-02-12 5:14 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-12 5:37 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-12 6:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-12 7:53 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-13 17:54 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2006-02-12 6:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-11 19:01 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-11 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2006-02-11 21:27 ` Christoph Lameter
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=Pine.LNX.4.62.0602130951110.1825@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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