linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, david@redhat.com,
	zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
	lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, hughd@google.com,
	willy@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: vmscan: simplify the logic for activating dirty file folios
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 14:02:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aPIwafJOKUh3N4zX@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba5c49955fd93c6850bcc19abf0e02e1573768aa.1760687075.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>

On Fri 17-10-25 15:53:07, Baolin Wang wrote:
> After commit 6b0dfabb3555 ("fs: Remove aops->writepage"), we no longer
> attempt to write back filesystem folios through reclaim.
> 
> However, in the shrink_folio_list() function, there still remains some
> logic related to writeback control of dirty file folios. The original
> logic was that, for direct reclaim, or when folio_test_reclaim() is false,
> or the PGDAT_DIRTY flag is not set, the dirty file folios would be directly
> activated to avoid being scanned again; otherwise, it will try to writeback
> the dirty file folios. However, since we can no longer perform writeback on
> dirty folios, the dirty file folios will still be activated.
> 
> Additionally, under the original logic, if we continue to try writeback dirty
> file folios, we will also check the references flag, sc->may_writepage, and
> may_enter_fs(), which may result in dirty file folios being left in the inactive
> list. This is unreasonable. Even if these dirty folios are scanned again, we
> still cannot clean them.
> 
> Therefore, the checks on these dirty file folios appear to be redundant and can
> be removed. Dirty file folios should be directly moved to the active list to
> avoid being scanned again. Since we set the PG_reclaim flag for the dirty folios,
> once the writeback is completed, they will be moved back to the tail of the
> inactive list to be retried for quick reclaim.

Is there any actual problem you are trying to address or is this a code
clean up? How have you evaluated this change? 

> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/mmzone.h |  4 ----
>  mm/vmscan.c            | 25 +++----------------------
>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> index 7fb7331c5725..4398e027f450 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> @@ -1060,10 +1060,6 @@ struct zone {
>  } ____cacheline_internodealigned_in_smp;
>  
>  enum pgdat_flags {
> -	PGDAT_DIRTY,			/* reclaim scanning has recently found
> -					 * many dirty file pages at the tail
> -					 * of the LRU.
> -					 */
>  	PGDAT_WRITEBACK,		/* reclaim scanning has recently found
>  					 * many pages under writeback
>  					 */
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 65f299e4b8f0..c922bad2b8fd 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1387,21 +1387,7 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct list_head *folio_list,
>  
>  		mapping = folio_mapping(folio);
>  		if (folio_test_dirty(folio)) {
> -			/*
> -			 * Only kswapd can writeback filesystem folios
> -			 * to avoid risk of stack overflow. But avoid
> -			 * injecting inefficient single-folio I/O into
> -			 * flusher writeback as much as possible: only
> -			 * write folios when we've encountered many
> -			 * dirty folios, and when we've already scanned
> -			 * the rest of the LRU for clean folios and see
> -			 * the same dirty folios again (with the reclaim
> -			 * flag set).
> -			 */
> -			if (folio_is_file_lru(folio) &&
> -			    (!current_is_kswapd() ||
> -			     !folio_test_reclaim(folio) ||
> -			     !test_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags))) {
> +			if (folio_is_file_lru(folio)) {
>  				/*
>  				 * Immediately reclaim when written back.
>  				 * Similar in principle to folio_deactivate()
> @@ -1410,7 +1396,8 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct list_head *folio_list,
>  				 */
>  				node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_VMSCAN_IMMEDIATE,
>  						nr_pages);
> -				folio_set_reclaim(folio);
> +				if (!folio_test_reclaim(folio))
> +					folio_set_reclaim(folio);
>  
>  				goto activate_locked;
>  			}
> @@ -6105,11 +6092,6 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
>  		if (sc->nr.writeback && sc->nr.writeback == sc->nr.taken)
>  			set_bit(PGDAT_WRITEBACK, &pgdat->flags);
>  
> -		/* Allow kswapd to start writing pages during reclaim.*/
> -		if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty &&
> -			sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
> -			set_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags);
> -
>  		/*
>  		 * If kswapd scans pages marked for immediate
>  		 * reclaim and under writeback (nr_immediate), it
> @@ -6850,7 +6832,6 @@ static void clear_pgdat_congested(pg_data_t *pgdat)
>  
>  	clear_bit(LRUVEC_NODE_CONGESTED, &lruvec->flags);
>  	clear_bit(LRUVEC_CGROUP_CONGESTED, &lruvec->flags);
> -	clear_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags);
>  	clear_bit(PGDAT_WRITEBACK, &pgdat->flags);
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.7
> 

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2025-10-17 12:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-17  7:53 [PATCH v2 0/2] optimize the logic for handling dirty file folios during reclaim Baolin Wang
2025-10-17  7:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: vmscan: filter out the dirty file folios for node_reclaim() Baolin Wang
2025-10-17  7:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: vmscan: simplify the logic for activating dirty file folios Baolin Wang
2025-10-17 12:02   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2025-10-20  7:34     ` Baolin Wang

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=aPIwafJOKUh3N4zX@tiehlicka \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --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