[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090528092345.58f31056.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 09:23:45 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, riel@...hat.com,
hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: release swap slots for actively used pages
On Wed, 27 May 2009 16:15:35 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2009 03:47:39 +0200
> Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
>
> > For anonymous pages activated by the reclaim scan or faulted from an
> > evicted page table entry we should always try to free up swap space.
> >
> > Both events indicate that the page is in active use and a possible
> > change in the working set. Thus removing the slot association from
> > the page increases the chance of the page being placed near its new
> > LRU buddies on the next eviction and helps keeping the amount of stale
> > swap cache entries low.
> >
> > try_to_free_swap() inherently only succeeds when the last user of the
> > swap slot vanishes so it is safe to use from places where that single
> > mapping just brought the page back to life.
> >
>
> Seems that this has a risk of worsening swap fragmentation for some
> situations. Or not, I have no way of knowing, really.
>
I'm afraid, too.
> > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> > index 8b4e40e..407ebf7 100644
> > --- a/mm/memory.c
> > +++ b/mm/memory.c
> > @@ -2671,8 +2671,7 @@ static int do_swap_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin(page, ptr);
> >
> > swap_free(entry);
> > - if (vm_swap_full() || (vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED) || PageMlocked(page))
> > - try_to_free_swap(page);
> > + try_to_free_swap(page);
> > unlock_page(page);
> >
> > if (write_access) {
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index 621708f..2f0549d 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -788,7 +788,7 @@ cull_mlocked:
> >
> > activate_locked:
> > /* Not a candidate for swapping, so reclaim swap space. */
> > - if (PageSwapCache(page) && vm_swap_full())
> > + if (PageSwapCache(page))
> > try_to_free_swap(page);
> > VM_BUG_ON(PageActive(page));
> > SetPageActive(page);
>
> How are we to know that this is a desirable patch for Linux??
I'm not sure what is the "purpose/benefit" of this patch...
In patch description,
"we should always try to free up swap space" ...then, why "should" ?
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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