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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D9ADC3DA6E for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 14:14:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C63518D0008; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:14:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C132D8D0001; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:14:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B02D38D0008; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:14:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F3E98D0001 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:14:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E59160B7E for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 14:14:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81587391396.23.C1C49BE Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35FA4100027 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 14:14:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf05.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=mJ9Y1aBn; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf05.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1703081656; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=upMoMYmYXslt+fyn4QzQsj8lri95H6D9tWlWB4yk1Ho=; b=N45eEjXCe/PMmp9oMviW95LQ+uFpqUEUyPrSj6YpNurTUSSTmkA6kHa61jX4OqLA0v979x bnxOjv73b78sM/xPJCf8EdvQg1jfZNR9NscpL9fnSjqfYxFj64u7+Qe3b1PxgZqydjoPuo IGCX5Ys9PwsBoUy9yaD0xjLGQHzicKY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf05.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=mJ9Y1aBn; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf05.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1703081656; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=g0MNo4kbxLT68mZZLdu/7roMYenyS/6elpKI7gGoygdiFolZef+QqWjxxTAOxeDxMwqp78 +9BpZzm8kRz+CVfVQHuXyRVnpBh01Xyhc5h858yYmysv4wk6yQTHSF78ip/2qUNzeKDzT9 SPwJZ4aND1PXQ6Pp9l9Ld+9g+ph9aFY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=upMoMYmYXslt+fyn4QzQsj8lri95H6D9tWlWB4yk1Ho=; b=mJ9Y1aBn9JmLEwVITeAsKLqvZ8 LOj/Pu6+e6LgY7pOSiNh6skuRG1mnu6M57KfmQzUNbnSmiBm0nv+IjgXQZ6J1/pnZmzaAlcpZEBd7 guriGYZT7ul2C/LcmDUYmeXMumGb0q3apjBlMuU3PDUJy4m4zXmDZu2IhWyVYIWHerAWjEG53Qrc8 sZToRI0FvIeYyOUoahnpVQ86dRVyg4/8vPOZtNNSeCpVm+WpnXt8wcxV/nZNmDMC5pn6sDZYZqTqo Fu4xdDrPU29rlnLfpfnL456hHDEe19fKK3qcpgzrowbzkeh29uRUklcblF+mIYLCTqIRSRP+YvUDW eozqVYgQ==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rFxKn-00436p-2d; Wed, 20 Dec 2023 14:14:05 +0000 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 14:14:05 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "zhaoyang.huang" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Zhaoyang Huang , steve.kang@unisoc.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] mm: mark folio accessed in minor fault Message-ID: References: <20231220102948.1963798-1-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231220102948.1963798-1-zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 35FA4100027 X-Stat-Signature: cyg57jybp7ywa4hioqqs1o8urhrk9ryi X-HE-Tag: 1703081655-723809 X-HE-Meta: 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 c72zmjRq G+IIjOvyYmv3cmcixPaAhl1KX7j6X3WD8P+9osnp0h2iL0+40ADjQcGVoqV0yzBEaak4krfP0P1B1Z9XYXlE/0pDKiaabhKBIAbzRGb6kfEe19fd7YjnXKjEVE80BYcue5jkJj0QJwzzxJoZu68oCpDP7+D2yp6Xzvk3oN6GLt4B30wYtIINEOprs531v4sSoxQsX 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 06:29:48PM +0800, zhaoyang.huang wrote: > From: Zhaoyang Huang > > Inactive mapped folio will be promoted to active only when it is > scanned in shrink_inactive_list, while the vfs folio will do this > immidiatly when it is accessed. These will introduce two affections: > > 1. NR_ACTIVE_FILE is not accurate as expected. > 2. Low reclaiming efficiency caused by dummy nactive folio which should > be kept as earlier as shrink_active_list. > > I would like to suggest mark the folio be accessed in minor fault to > solve this situation. This isn't going to be as effective as you imagine. Almost all file faults are handled through filemap_map_pages(). So I must ask, what testing have you done with this patch? And while you're gathering data, what effect would this patch have on your workloads? diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c index 2e6b1daac6cd..8cecf82dcc5a 100644 --- a/mm/filemap.c +++ b/mm/filemap.c @@ -3418,6 +3418,7 @@ static struct folio *next_uptodate_folio(struct xa_state *xas, max_idx = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(mapping->host), PAGE_SIZE); if (xas->xa_index >= max_idx) goto unlock; + folio_mark_accessed(folio); return folio; unlock: folio_unlock(folio);