From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: lipeifeng@oppo.com
Cc: 21cnbao@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@redhat.com,
osalvador@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] reclaim contended folios asynchronously instead of promoting them
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 04:56:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZeqajmATLj5gm6Bv@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240308031126.750-1-lipeifeng@oppo.com>
On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 11:11:24AM +0800, lipeifeng@oppo.com wrote:
> Commit 6d4675e60135 ("mm: don't be stuck to rmap lock on reclaim path")
> prevents the reclaim path from becoming stuck on the rmap lock. However,
> it reinserts those folios at the head of the LRU during shrink_folio_list,
> even if those folios are very cold.
This seems like a lot of new code. Did you consider something simpler
like this?
Also, this is Minchan's patch you're complaining about. Add him to the
cc.
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -817,6 +817,7 @@ enum folio_references {
FOLIOREF_RECLAIM,
FOLIOREF_RECLAIM_CLEAN,
FOLIOREF_KEEP,
+ FOLIOREF_RESCAN,
FOLIOREF_ACTIVATE,
};
@@ -837,9 +838,9 @@ static enum folio_references folio_check_references(struct folio *folio,
if (vm_flags & VM_LOCKED)
return FOLIOREF_ACTIVATE;
- /* rmap lock contention: rotate */
+ /* rmap lock contention: keep at the tail */
if (referenced_ptes == -1)
- return FOLIOREF_KEEP;
+ return FOLIOREF_RESCAN;
if (referenced_ptes) {
/*
@@ -1164,6 +1165,7 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct list_head *folio_list,
case FOLIOREF_ACTIVATE:
goto activate_locked;
case FOLIOREF_KEEP:
+ case FOLIOREF_RESCAN:
stat->nr_ref_keep += nr_pages;
goto keep_locked;
case FOLIOREF_RECLAIM:
@@ -1446,7 +1448,10 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct list_head *folio_list,
keep_locked:
folio_unlock(folio);
keep:
- list_add(&folio->lru, &ret_folios);
+ if (references == FOLIOREF_RESCAN)
+ list_add(&folio->lru, &rescan_folios);
+ else
+ list_add(&folio->lru, &ret_folios);
VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio) ||
folio_test_unevictable(folio), folio);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-08 4:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-08 3:11 lipeifeng
2024-03-08 3:11 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/rmap: provide folio_referenced with the options to try_lock or lock lipeifeng
2024-03-08 3:11 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: vmscan: reclaim contended folios asynchronously instead of promoting them lipeifeng
2024-03-08 4:56 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2024-03-08 6:41 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " 李培锋
2024-03-11 11:14 ` 李培锋
2024-03-12 9:22 ` 李培锋
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=ZeqajmATLj5gm6Bv@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lipeifeng@oppo.com \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
/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