[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090115224112.EBEC.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:43:04 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
lizf@...fujitsu.com, menage@...gle.com,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mark_page_accessed() in do_swap_page() move latter than memcg charge
> (CC to Rik and Nick)
>
> Hi
>
> Thank you reviewing.
>
> > > mark_page_accessed() update reclaim_stat statics.
> > > but currently, memcg charge is called after mark_page_accessed().
> > >
> > > then, mark_page_accessed() don't update memcg statics correctly.
> >
> > Statics? "Stats" is a good abbreviation for statistics,
> > but statics are something else.
>
> Doh! your are definitly right. thanks.
>
> > > ---
> > > mm/memory.c | 4 ++--
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Index: b/mm/memory.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- a/mm/memory.c
> > > +++ b/mm/memory.c
> > > @@ -2426,8 +2426,6 @@ static int do_swap_page(struct mm_struct
> > > count_vm_event(PGMAJFAULT);
> > > }
> > >
> > > - mark_page_accessed(page);
> > > -
> > > lock_page(page);
> > > delayacct_clear_flag(DELAYACCT_PF_SWAPIN);
> > >
> > > @@ -2480,6 +2478,8 @@ static int do_swap_page(struct mm_struct
> > > try_to_free_swap(page);
> > > unlock_page(page);
> > >
> > > + mark_page_accessed(page);
> > > +
> > > if (write_access) {
> > > ret |= do_wp_page(mm, vma, address, page_table, pmd, ptl, pte);
> > > if (ret & VM_FAULT_ERROR)
> >
> > This catches my eye, because I'd discussed with Nick and was going to
> > send in a patch which entirely _removes_ this mark_page_accessed call
> > from do_swap_page (and replaces follow_page's mark_page_accessed call
> > by a pte_mkyoung): they seem inconsistent to me, in the light of
> > bf3f3bc5e734706730c12a323f9b2068052aa1f0 mm: don't mark_page_accessed
> > in fault path.
>
> Actually, bf3f3bc5e734706730c12a323f9b2068052aa1f0 only remove
> the mark_page_accessed() in filemap_fault().
> current mmotm's do_swap_page() still have mark_page_accessed().
>
> but your suggestion is very worth.
> ok, I'm thinking and sorting out again.
>
> Rik's commit 9ff473b9a72942c5ac0ad35607cae28d8d59ed7a vmscan: evict streaming IO first
> does "reclaim stastics don't only update at reclaim, but also at fault and read/write.
> it makes proper anon/file reclaim balancing stastics value before starting actual reclaim".
> and it depend on fault path calling mark_page_accessed().
>
> Then, we need following change. I think.
>
> - Remove calling mark_page_accessed() in do_swap_page().
> it makes consistency against filemap_fault().
> - Add calling update_page_reclaim_stat() into do_swap_page() and
> filemap_fault().
>
> Am I overlooking something?
Doh! please ignore last mail's patch. I forgot grab zone->lru_lock.
it's perfectly buggy.
I'll make it again tommorow.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists